Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
496 196 1.8k
  • First of all, it was performed the way that nobody knew what to even do with those privatization vouchers. They didn't directly give anyone stocks, just vouchers for part of a company etc. Those had to be exchanged for stocks.

    People didn't know what to do with them, people had problems feeding their families, and people were offered some money for them. And people thought that's what capitalism is, you get offered money for something, you give it. Nobody scams you, right?

    Since those oligarchs happened to all have right friends, it's without any doubt not a mistake that those stocks could even be sold.

    And - attention - another history lesson. All the Soviet propaganda against religion led to everyone becoming "kinda church-loving" in the 90-s initially. All the Soviet propaganda for scientific view of the world led to thousands of sects and charlatans, together scamming most of the population. All the Soviet propaganda for honest and labor ethic led to most people not even considering such scams really scams, because in Soviet propaganda doing business was treated same as scamming someone.

    So nobody even thought what's happening is wrong. And the part of the population which did understand was those who got the shorter stick. People losing themselves in a bottle or a needle, people literally dying from hunger, people having to do crime or prostitution or mercenary work to survive. It was an unholy kingdom where for a part of the population it seemed they are almost the middle class now, just like in those American movies and ads, and the other part saw those ads and those people daily, but could barely survive.

    And then, after a few years, the former part grew some understanding that Russia is approaching fascism, and the latter part, which already lived it since 1993, was so broken that it obeyed the fascists after they gave it a bit of a life without hunger and depression in the 00s.

    See, there is a layer of the Russian (and general ex-Soviet) culture, in vibes and emotions, showing things as they really were, but it's horrible to look into that. It was plainly impossible for a normal person to accept some group of people like Anatoly Sobchak's daughter as opposition. After real opposition figures were being marginalized, jailed and even murdered for a few years. After the Chechen wars. After the way that privatization happened, and the 1993. Nobody would follow people who are just a subset of the same evil, except playing clean because it's in fashion.

    Then, of course, such a decision, so to say, made by a whole country leads to madness.

    And this is what we live since then. Those stormtroopers on crutches storming Ukrainian positions - they know that their orders come from the evil itself. They are not fighting for something or against something, only to feel that evil as more material, or take their share of the suffering, or prove something to themselves. It's a whole society of depressed people who need to prove something to themselves, because everything around is both evil, fake and dirty, one yearns for purification. It's desperation of the better kind of people, whether you believe it or not. The worst kind finds ways not to die. It's even natural for humans, like best shown in Japanese culture of honorable death. In European military cultures honorable suicide was a thing, well, in 2022 a few Russian generals shot themselves. I've read about them.

    It's really disgusting to be of the "fat" part of the population of these two.

    Thank you for elaborating my point. It’s all very reminiscent of what’s going on right now in the United States. 20 years of an infowar and the American people seem to be in a similar position. The majority of this country doesn’t understand what going on in financial markets yet they all depend on them to survive their retirements. The wealth is being massively consolidated through means that people don’t understand.

    Anyway appreciate you bringing the proper details into my point. And the chilling reminder of what the future holds.

  • I don’t think what I’m saying is controversial.

    no, it's simply business as usual, nothing ever changes, nothing ever improves, and fuck you america, that's the way it has to be because reasons.

    I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don't you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don't you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

    Do you really think soldiers sailors and airmen (and spacemonkeys) should have to rely on that HORSE DRUG ADDICTED PRICK for their mission critical infrastructure?

    If you do, fuck right off, you're either a musk fanboy or stockholder.

    Either way, get bent.

    I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don’t you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don’t you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

    ROTFL, SpaceX managed 259 launch in 2024, show me how many launch managed NASA, if they are more than maybe you are right, else...

  • I never claimed to like Elon. I don’t. I never expressed support for this administration’s policies. I don’t.

    you just defend his right to run spaceX on specialK.

    mmkay bud.

    I don't give two flying fucks who runs space x. Once again. I'm not defending Elon in anyway.

    I am expressing my concern about the United States government nationalizing a private company. You're still making bassless assumptions. Pull your head out of your own ass and actually think about what I'm saying before spouting off at the mouth.

  • I never claimed to like Elon. I don’t. I never expressed support for this administration’s policies. I don’t.

    you just defend his right to run spaceX on specialK.

    mmkay bud.

    you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

    Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
    Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

    But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

  • No I’m also with the commies on single payer health care and super high tax brackets for the rich. I do hate me a fascism, infact I hate all authoritarians.

    I’m clearly for the workers rights we have fought for and established in this country. And while I can acknowledge the communist impact in these achievements, I would not go ahead and give you guys full credit nor say that these are policies that are specific to you. Most of this stuff is just center/left social welfare and human rights. Commies are the ones that like to do purity tests and isolate anyone that doesn’t agree with 100% of your policy points.

    Pretty big jumps from liberal to leftist to self proclaimed communist ideas on how these ideas and policies look, so yes we agree on general principles and concepts. But we certainly don’t agree on how to bring them about.

    Also, every single self-proclaimed communist is on the suspect list because you guys did a lot of campaigning against Joe Biden to help Donald Trump get elected so I’m just saying I don’t really fuck with you guys anymore. That’s my new purity test. Did you support Joe Biden and Kamala during the most important election in American history?

    super high tax brackets for the rich

    I'm a communist and I believe in the expropriation of their capital to eliminate super-richness, not in their taxation.

    workers rights we have fought for and established in this country

    Your country (the US judging by the comment) has miserable worker rights, as a western-European. Worker rights are bad here, but the US takes the cake.

    I would not go ahead and give you guys full credit nor say that these are policies that are specific to you. Most of this stuff is just center/left social welfare and human rights

    I'm not so sure. The legal abolition of homelessness and unemployment is far from being a centre/left welfare measure, as evidenced by the fact that the only countries that have achieved this are communist ones such as Cuba or the Soviet Union.

    we certainly don’t agree on how to bring them about

    We don't agree on how to bring them about because the liberal method of bringing them about is proven ineffective in every single instance of liberal democracy. Worker rights and welfare are systematically being eroded in essentially all liberal democracies for the past 3-4 decades, home ownership rates decrease, unemployment increases, retirement age gets delayed (Denmark just rose it to 70 years e.g.), education and healthcare budgets get gutted, infrastructure crumbles, real wages diminish for the majority of the population, and little action is taken against climate change. There were only advancements in worker rights in Europe (and less so in the USA) because of the fear of communist revolution in the past century, hence the complete lack of progress and actual degradation of rights and democracy with the rise of the far right all over the Western World.

    I'm not USian so I didn't support any of your genocidal candidates. Funny how you talked of purity tests earlier in your comment and come up with that later. But as an outsider: the US liberal obsession with blaming the election loss on the progressives and not on, you know, the politicians enacting genocide and not doing anything about improving the living conditions of people in the US while in government seems pretty weird. If the Democrats can't bring themselves to even remotely appear more appealing than LITERAL DONALD TRUMP to the average voter, what the fuck are they doing?

  • Then make it work.

    Stop cutting their funding and saying the earth is flat and that global warming is a myth.

  • How has spacex had very few successes? Their Falcon 9 rocket is basically operating like clockwork. They launch more rockets than the rest of the world combined.

    The starship failures are higher profile but even those failures are typical when testing new vehicles, especially one as experimental and complex.

    They weren't as typical with previous SpaceX models, Starship is easily their least successful project.

    Since SpaceX is launching large quantities of commercial satellites, big whoop, do you also celebrate when companies buy back stocks?

  • Yes sorry. We nationalized General Motors in 2009 Amtrak in 1973 the banks in 2008.

    Don’t even get me started on World War II

    All of these were taken by the state, not the workers, which was the question.

  • Idk why everyone keeps talking like nationalizing Elon musk companies means changing them? It’s just removing Elon musk from them, and then reordering them to the public.

    Also hello cyber truck called and that was Elon musk at the helm. He’s good for making good teams and bad decisions

    I mean companies can force him out by themselves if they're pressured enough. Also all companies make unsuccessful business bets. What matters is that from a neutral third person point of view, these companies aren't doing anything that they're not supposed to be doing. They're putting sectors of the American economy in danger of collapse, they're not committing crimes left and right, and their services are satisfactory for most people.

  • Starlink should be globalized. A planet only needs one low-altitude orbiting communications network. Better to standardize the technology and platform and let them contribute to one system than to have a dozen identical competing systems crashing into each other and fucking things up for everyone.

    Ah. My Kessler syndrome is acting up again.

  • The automotive manufacturers General Motors and Chrysler were partially nationalized in the wake of the 2008 Financial Crisis as were several banks... these were less a full government takeover and more of a government guided restructuring, but the government owned large stakes in these companies. Before that, the only full nationalization of anything substantial was the bankruptcy of the Penn Central Railroad and subsequent establishment of Consolidated Rail (branded as ConRail) the US's only national freight rail company.

    Conrail was later privatized into what is now the private companies CSX and Norfolk Southern. The collapse of Penn Central was the largest bankruptcy in history until Enron in the 1990's. Amtrak, our national passenger rail corporation, is also a nationalized entity created around the same time as ConRail, for similar reasons, and is still nationalized (although the Trump admin wants to privatize it).

    Didn't know about Amtrak. Interesting. Thanks

  • They weren't as typical with previous SpaceX models, Starship is easily their least successful project.

    Since SpaceX is launching large quantities of commercial satellites, big whoop, do you also celebrate when companies buy back stocks?

    Why would I celebrate stock buybacks?

    Also spacex lost like 20 or so Falcons before their first successful mission. Maybe they will explode as many Starships, but they have hit that number yet.

    It’s ok to hate Elon, and there are many valid criticisms to make regarding spacex, but they’re the best in the world right now and it isn’t even close.

    The biggest issue with Spacex is that Elon needs to be removed before he ruins it like he ruined Tesla.

  • you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

    Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
    Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

    But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

    ffs have better standards in your selection of contractors. or perhaps you're on too much horse tranq too.

  • you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

    Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
    Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

    But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

    But obviously you seems to not understand

    Yeah, and obviously, you only have a passing familiarity with the english language.

  • I don't give two flying fucks who runs space x. Once again. I'm not defending Elon in anyway.

    I am expressing my concern about the United States government nationalizing a private company. You're still making bassless assumptions. Pull your head out of your own ass and actually think about what I'm saying before spouting off at the mouth.

    then defend his drug use. defend doge. come on, make rational arguments for the bullshit, oh, you can't, that's why you're down to insults.

    look fuckwit, you couldn't find your point with a flashlight and a map, and you're telling me to remove my rectum from MY CRANIUM? You want a man addled on horse tranq to run the only company producing orbital launch for the US.

    I think it's your head that's rectum-fied. In fact, this entire discourse is dragging me down to your level. Gonna block you, should have done it before. Enjoy your ketamine kid, hope when he's responsible for killing astronauts you pause and reflect.

    pfft

  • I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don’t you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don’t you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

    ROTFL, SpaceX managed 259 launch in 2024, show me how many launch managed NASA, if they are more than maybe you are right, else...

    You think my dislike of Musk is all of spaceX. I don't want him ruining spaceX. Musk is responsible for the launch cadence that keeps exploding, if you'd like to make comparisons.

  • then defend his drug use. defend doge. come on, make rational arguments for the bullshit, oh, you can't, that's why you're down to insults.

    look fuckwit, you couldn't find your point with a flashlight and a map, and you're telling me to remove my rectum from MY CRANIUM? You want a man addled on horse tranq to run the only company producing orbital launch for the US.

    I think it's your head that's rectum-fied. In fact, this entire discourse is dragging me down to your level. Gonna block you, should have done it before. Enjoy your ketamine kid, hope when he's responsible for killing astronauts you pause and reflect.

    pfft

    Absolute moron. You absolute moron. Once again my argument is about nationalizing a private company.

    Is there anything that you'd like to talk about concerning that!

  • You think my dislike of Musk is all of spaceX. I don't want him ruining spaceX. Musk is responsible for the launch cadence that keeps exploding, if you'd like to make comparisons.

    Wait a minute. It is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding, they had their fair share of failures (and some even letal).

    But the main difference is that SpaceX and NASA have different approaches: NASA cannot, for various polical reasons, tolerate a rocket exploding during a test, SpaceX can.
    I would argue that NASA, in its current incarnation and political situation, would never be able to design, build and manage something like the Falcon 9.

    So Musk is not ruining SpaceX with the Starship failures in my opinion, since it is inherent to SpaceX that way to work.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

  • Stop cutting their funding and saying the earth is flat and that global warming is a myth.

    Stop cutting their funding

    Stop electing stupid people and maybe you will get something.

    and saying the earth is flat

    Stop treating every opinion as worth of discussion even if it is clearly stupid.

    and that global warming is a myth.

    Start to propose some reasonable solutions and start to pass over the NIMBY syndrome.
    (and no, only stopping to use ICE cars or fossil fuel is not a reasonable solution until you propose a sustainable alternative solution)

  • Wait a minute. It is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding, they had their fair share of failures (and some even letal).

    But the main difference is that SpaceX and NASA have different approaches: NASA cannot, for various polical reasons, tolerate a rocket exploding during a test, SpaceX can.
    I would argue that NASA, in its current incarnation and political situation, would never be able to design, build and manage something like the Falcon 9.

    So Musk is not ruining SpaceX with the Starship failures in my opinion, since it is inherent to SpaceX that way to work.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

    is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding

    dude english, wtf is this sentence even supposed to say? are you an LLM?

    fucking hell.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

    again with the word salad. english better be your third or 4th language.

    if you doubt his stupidity, then evaluate the logic of doing large amounts OF HORSE TRANQUALIZER WHILE MANAGING MULTIPLE COMPANIES AND LAUNCHING ROCKETS.

    Come on, make that one make sense word salad llm

  • 'I've been turned into an AI train announcer - and no one told me'

    Technology technology
    15
    318 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    85 Aufrufe
    S
    Yes, the use of the voice was intentionally misleading. That's why it was decided the way it was.
  • No JS, No CSS, No HTML: online "clubs" celebrate plainer websites

    Technology technology
    205
    2
    772 Stimmen
    205 Beiträge
    701 Aufrufe
    R
    Gemini is just a web replacement protocol. With basic things we remember from olden days Web, but with everything non-essential removed, for a client to be doable in a couple of days. I have my own Gemini viewer, LOL. This for me seems a completely different application from torrents. I was dreaming for a thing similar to torrent trackers for aggregating storage and computation and indexing and search, with search and aggregation and other services' responses being structured and standardized, and cryptographic identities, and some kind of market services to sell and buy storage and computation in unified and pooled, but transparent way (scripted by buyer\seller), similar to MMORPG markets, with the representation (what is a siloed service in modern web) being on the client native application, and those services allowing to build any kind of client-server huge system on them, that being global. But that's more of a global Facebook\Usenet\whatever, a killer of platforms. Their infrastructure is internal, while their representation is public on the Internet. I want to make infrastructure public on the Internet, and representation client-side, sharing it for many kinds of applications. Adding another layer to the OSI model, so to say, between transport and application layer. For this application: I think you could have some kind of Kademlia-based p2p with groups voluntarily joined (involving very huge groups) where nodes store replicas of partitions of group common data based on their pseudo-random identifiers and/or some kind of ring built from those identifiers, to balance storage and resilience. If a group has a creator, then you can have replication factor propagated signed by them, and membership too signed by them. But if having a creator (even with cryptographically delegated decisions) and propagating changes by them is not ok, then maybe just using whole data hash, or it's bittorrent-like info tree hash, as namespace with peers freely joining it can do. Then it may be better to partition not by parts of the whole piece, but by info tree? I guess making it exactly bittorrent-like is not a good idea, rather some kind of block tree, like for a filesystem, and a separate piece of information to lookup which file is in which blocks. If we are doing directory structure. Then, with freely joining it, there's no need in any owners or replication factors, I guess just pseudorandom distribution of hashes will do, and each node storing first partitions closest to its hash. Now thinking about it, such a system would be not that different from bittorrent and can even be interoperable with it. There's the issue of updates, yes, hence I've started with groups having hierarchy of creators, who can make or accept those updates. Having that and the ability to gradually store one group's data to another group, it should be possible to do forks of a certain state. But that line of thought makes reusing bittorrent only possible for part of the system. The whole database is guaranteed to be more than a normal HDD (1 TB? I dunno). Absolutely guaranteed, no doubt at all. 1 TB (for example) would be someone's collection of favorite stuff, and not too rich one.
  • How not to lose your job to AI

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    9 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    75 Aufrufe
    rikudou@lemmings.worldR
    A nice "trick": After 4 or so responses where you can't get anywhere, start a new chat without the wrong context. Of course refine your question with whatever you have found out in the previous chat.
  • 15 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    64 Aufrufe
    S
    Why call it AI? Is it learning and said-modifying? If not then is it not just regular programming but "AI" sounds better for investors?
  • 1 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 761 Stimmen
    187 Beiträge
    503 Aufrufe
    O
    Not being a coward.
  • 62 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    W
    What could possibly go wrong? Edit: reads like the substrate still needs to be introduced first
  • 1 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    L
    I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.