They failed to stick the landing of the booster 1st stage (or even come close). That's remarkable (and they're remarkably silent).
The gossip seems to be suggesting that a landing leg failed through either not deploying, or did deploy but didn't lock and so the booster didn't adjust its trajectory to land on the drone ship. (Every landing has the first stage coming in over the ocean, and only shifts to the ship in the last moments if everything is good).
Confirmed to be an error in testing procedure, the bottom tank was depressurized before the top tank.
Yeah, when fuelled it's more like a balloon than a rigid structure. It's not unknown for rockets to be like that. So long as procedures are followed properly (which they weren't in this case) it's not really a problem. After all this vehicle is intended to spend a lot of its time working in vacuum, if they can't control pressurisation correctly then it crumpling on the launch pad is one of the least disastrous outcomes. Elon Musk has also used a similar argument when putting forward the case for Starship having no launch escape system. Starship is designed for crewed take off and landing on the Moon and Mars, where a launch escape system would just prolong the inevitable so they need to design the thing to be reliable.
All liquid fueled rockets are beer cans. I have nothing against beer cans. Solid fuel boosters can be annoying.
yeah, no he hasn't turned. It helps to be a sociopath if you're going to build a starship to leave the earth.