Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
480 193 3
  • 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

  • The weaponization of Waymo

    Technology technology
    13
    1
    90 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    pticrix@lemmy.caP
    good to know there's a button in the car. For some reason I thought there only was one in the app which, would it have been the case, is fine if you called the car, but if you're a guest passenger or just in an emergency and can't use the phone, then you'd be screwed.
  • 386 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    C
    Melon Usk doomed their FSD efforts from the start with his dunning-kruger-brain take of "humans drive just using their eyes, so cars shouldn't need any sensors besides cameras." Considering how many excellent engineers there are (or were, at least) at his companies, it's kind of fascinating how "stupid at the top" is just as bad, if not worse, than "stupid all the way down."
  • Google confirms more ads on your paid YouTube Premium Lite soon

    Technology technology
    268
    1
    938 Stimmen
    268 Beiträge
    8 Aufrufe
    pfr@lemmy.sdf.orgP
    I think it's because it's a desktop app only (for now) and most people are consuming content on handhelds? Just a theory.. Freetube does need an app. I use a fork of NewPipe called PipeBender on Android and it works most of the time but not all the time. Freetube has never failed me though.
  • 1k Stimmen
    145 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    P
    Not just that. The tax preparation industry has gotten tax more complex and harder to file in the US You get the government you can afford. The tax preparation industry has been able to buy several governments
  • 109 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    3 Aufrufe
    I
    Their previous GPU used an old AMD GPU design if I recall correctly. I wonder if they have in-house stuff now.
  • Why doesn't Nvidia have more competition?

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    33 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    B
    It’s funny how the article asks the question, but completely fails to answer it. About 15 years ago, Nvidia discovered there was a demand for compute in datacenters that could be met with powerful GPU’s, and they were quick to respond to it, and they had the resources to focus on it strongly, because of their huge success and high profitability in the GPU market. AMD also saw the market, and wanted to pursue it, but just over a decade ago where it began to clearly show the high potential for profitability, AMD was near bankrupt, and was very hard pressed to finance developments on GPU and compute in datacenters. AMD really tried the best they could, and was moderately successful from a technology perspective, but Nvidia already had a head start, and the proprietary development system CUDA was already an established standard that was very hard to penetrate. Intel simply fumbled the ball from start to finish. After a decade of trying to push ARM down from having the mobile crown by far, investing billions or actually the equivalent of ARM’s total revenue. They never managed to catch up to ARM despite they had the better production process at the time. This was the main focus of Intel, and Intel believed that GPU would never be more than a niche product. So when intel tried to compete on compute for datacenters, they tried to do it with X86 chips, One of their most bold efforts was to build a monstrosity of a cluster of Celeron chips, which of course performed laughably bad compared to Nvidia! Because as it turns out, the way forward at least for now, is indeed the massively parralel compute capability of a GPU, which Nvidia has refined for decades, only with (inferior) competition from AMD. But despite the lack of competition, Nvidia did not slow down, in fact with increased profits, they only grew bolder in their efforts. Making it even harder to catch up. Now AMD has had more money to compete for a while, and they do have some decent compute units, but Nvidia remains ahead and the CUDA problem is still there, so for AMD to really compete with Nvidia, they have to be better to attract customers. That’s a very tall order against Nvidia that simply seems to never stop progressing. So the only other option for AMD is to sell a bit cheaper. Which I suppose they have to. AMD and Intel were the obvious competitors, everybody else is coming from even further behind. But if I had to make a bet, it would be on Huawei. Huawei has some crazy good developers, and Trump is basically forcing them to figure it out themselves, because he is blocking Huawei and China in general from using both AMD and Nvidia AI chips. And the chips will probably be made by Chinese SMIC, because they are also prevented from using advanced production in the west, most notably TSMC. China will prevail, because it’s become a national project, of both prestige and necessity, and they have a massive talent mass and resources, so nothing can stop it now. IMO USA would clearly have been better off allowing China to use American chips. Now China will soon compete directly on both production and design too.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    L
    Divide and conquer. Non state-actors and special interest have a far easier time attacking a hundred small entities than one big one. Because people have much less bandwidth to track all this shit than it is to spread it around. See ALEC and the strategy behind state rights. In the end this is about economic power. The only way to curb it is through a democratic government. Lemmy servers too can be bought and sold and the communities captured that grew on them.
  • Moon missions: How to avoid a puncture on the Moon

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    14 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet