 |
|
|
|||||
The Federal Aviation Administration is ordering SpaceX to conduct a mishap investigation into what caused the company's Starship rocket to explode mid-flight on January 16. Until the FAA approves SpaceX's investigation reported, the company won't be allowed to proceed with future Starship missions. SpaceX's launch seemed to be going as planned prior to the explosion. Starship successfully made it off the launch pad and SpaceX was even able to catch the ship's boosters. But then, only eight and a half minutes after taking off, the Starship spacecraft exploded, according to SpaceX's post-launch blog post. In response to the sudden explosion, the FAA activated a "Debris Response Area" and slowed or diverted nearby flights to prevent further accidents, severely delaying flights from multiple airlines, according to CNBC. Success is uncertain, but entertainment is guaranteed! pic.twitter.com/nn3PiP8XwG Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 16, 2025 The FAA's statement says that no one was injured by the falling debris but that its working "to confirm reports of public property damage on Turks and Caicos." The mishap investigation SpaceX performs will have to determine not only what caused the explosion, but also what corrective actions the company needs to take to prevent it from happening again. "Initial data indicates a fire developed in the aft section of the ship," SpaceX says. This isn't the first time Starship has met an explosive end. Multiple Starship launches have ended with either SpaceX's boosters, the Starship spacecraft or both exploding. The company does appear to be getting better at catching and reusing its Super Heavy boosters, however. The successful catch that preceded the January 16 explosion is only the second time SpaceX has pulled it off. Its first successful Super Heavy catch was in October 2024.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/science/space/the-faa-is-grounding-spacexs-starship-after-its-latest-explosion-223535001.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
On Thursday, The New York Times published a lengthy story about the rise in power of Stephen Miller, a longtime loyalist of Donald Trump known for his hardline views on immigration. Normally, a story like that wouldnt get much attention in the tech press. But the piece opened with an anecdote about Mark Zuckerberg that immediately raised eyebrows. The story detailed a recent meeting Miller had with Zuckerberg when the Meta CEO traveled to Mar-a-Lago last year. According to The Times, Zuckerberg who would soon renounce Metas prior fact checking efforts and ditch corporate diversity programs blamed his former chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, for an inclusivity initiative at Facebook that encouraged employees self-expression in the workplace. That line set off a fresh round of speculation (and some outrage) in tech circles. Sandberg, who left Meta in 2022 and rose to fame after authoring her women in the workplace manifesto Lean In, was known for her once close partnership with Zuckerberg at the top of Facebook. That Zuckerberg would blame his former top lieutenant for fostering inclusivity at his company, raised eyebrows even among longtime observers of the company. She always knew who Mark Zuckerberg and covered for him, New York Times reporter Sheera Frankel, who co-wrote a book about Facebooks dominance, observed on Bluesky. The question is whether she will continue to do so when he so blatantly throws her under the (Trump) bus. Journalist and longtime tech pundit Kara Swisher likewise noted that folks I talked to tonight from the Mark/Sheryl Facebook era are shocked but not surprised by his blaming her. I also weighed in on my Threads account, sharing a link to a Business Insider story from February that quoted an interview in which Zuckerberg said that Sandberg had raised him like a parent. I joked that the comment hadnt aged well. But on Friday, Zuckerberg decided to let me (and I guess everyone else) know that he and Sandberg are still cool, after all. Sheryl did amazing work at Meta and will forever be a legend in the industry, he wrote in a reply to my post. She built one of the greatest businesses of all time and taught me much of what I know. Threads Zuckerberg did not respond when I asked if Sandberg was too focused on DEI initiatives at Meta or whether she took away from the masculine energy he recently told Joe Rogan corporations should embody. (Notably, he has not denied The Times reporting about his comments on Sandberg.) But, a few minutes later, Sandberg jumped in to helpfully let me know there are no hard feelings on her side, either. Thank you, @zuck. I will always be grateful for the many years we spent building a great business together - and for your friendship that got me through some of the hardest times of my life and continues to this day. Zuckerberg responded with a single heart emoji. So, I guess that settles it. Nothing to see here, folks. Mark and Sheryl are definitely still friends. They may not work at the same company anymore, but they are still able to come together to head off a potential PR crisis. What could be more inspiring than that?This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/mark-zuckerberg-and-sheryl-sandberg-want-you-to-know-theyre-still-friends-and-definitely-not-mad-at-each-other-222145203.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
Greta Gerwig's follow-up to Barbie, an adaptation of one of C.S Lewis' Chronicles of Narnia books, will be exclusively viewable in theaters for four weeks before it hits Netflix on Christmas, according to a new report from Puck. Netflix is historically anti-theater, but it seems like it can set that aside for the right filmmaker. Theaters will have a four-week exclusive window on the film globally longer than the week Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery got but it will only be available to watch on IMAX screens to start. IMAX is guaranteeing the film will be shown in the format for two weeks, according to Puck, and is willing to add another week if there's demand. After that, the film could come to non-IMAX theaters, too. Netflix, while owning a few theaters itself, is philosophically-opposed to theatrical exclusivity. It'll put Netflix movies in theaters for the amount of time required to qualify for awards season, but otherwise avoids them like the plague. That might be nice for subscribers who've become accustomed to watching everything at home, but most filmmakers want their films to be seen on the big screen. For example, Netflix reportedly lost the chance to distribute Saltburn director Emerald Fennel's next film, an adaptation of Wuthering Heights, because it refused to give the film time in theaters, according to The New York Times. Rumors circulated that IMAX, Gerwig, and Netflix were discussing a deal in October 2024, and it seems the director got her way. It's strange to have to fight tooth and nail for what could be a blockbuster movie to be seen by a paying audience. There's plenty of evidence that putting films in theaters makes money, but it's a lesson that even company's like Disney have had to relearn after the streaming boom. Moana 2 started as a Disney+ filler before it was tweaked and turned into a theatrical release that made over $200 million in December 2024. It's impossible to say if this decision signals a longterm change at Netflix, but future filmmakers working with the company now have interesting precedent to point to for their own theatrical deals.This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/tv-movies/greta-gerwigs-narnia-movie-will-get-up-to-four-weeks-in-theaters-203920581.html?src=rss
Category:
Marketing and Advertising
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||