Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
491 196 26
  • 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

  • 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

    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?

    Nope, just a regular guy that do not speak English as first language.

    But let me rephrase it, even if i am sure you understand what I mean.
    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    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.

    You are right. But again, I am sure you understand what I mean, but ok, let me rephrase also this.
    Musk is sometime too borderline but I suppose that actually he really don't want to ruin his companies because, for bad as you can think about him, I think is not that stupid.

    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

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?
    Again, you can think what you want about Musk himself, but the track record for SpaceX (over 250 launch in 2024) and Tesla (it demostrated something that every other car manufacturer deemed impossible) does not seems too bad.
    And I would like to have an estimate about the "large amounts"

    But feel free to attack my grammar and hate Musk.

  • It is usually due to "budget cuts" as the easiest way to kill a project is to defend it.

    Juno Jupiter flyby

    Maven mission to mars

    New horizons kbo flyby

    Terra mission-earth science satellite

    Aqua mission -earth science satellite

    DSCOVR

    SLS-which may actually be a bad program but is a good example of the political issues with NASA vs senate.

    Juno Jupiter flyby

    But Juno went to Jupiter?

  • Juno Jupiter flyby

    But Juno went to Jupiter?

    These programs require continuous funding. The probe went to Jupiter. The scientist and listening stations back on earth still have to run to receive the data.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Don't buy into the grifts. Dismantle them.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    we should probably invest in making sure people have affordable housing, food, and healthcare before worrying about militarising space.

  • 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?

    Nope, just a regular guy that do not speak English as first language.

    But let me rephrase it, even if i am sure you understand what I mean.
    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    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.

    You are right. But again, I am sure you understand what I mean, but ok, let me rephrase also this.
    Musk is sometime too borderline but I suppose that actually he really don't want to ruin his companies because, for bad as you can think about him, I think is not that stupid.

    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

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?
    Again, you can think what you want about Musk himself, but the track record for SpaceX (over 250 launch in 2024) and Tesla (it demostrated something that every other car manufacturer deemed impossible) does not seems too bad.
    And I would like to have an estimate about the "large amounts"

    But feel free to attack my grammar and hate Musk.

    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60's tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy's goal of humans on the moon first). There's no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he's distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he'd step down.

    None of this is complex. I'm glad you speak english well enough to reorder your thoughts in a comprehensible manner, but the premise remains unchanged. Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I will feel free to attack musk, didn't need your permission but thanks!

  • When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60's tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy's goal of humans on the moon first). There's no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he's distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he'd step down.

    None of this is complex. I'm glad you speak english well enough to reorder your thoughts in a comprehensible manner, but the premise remains unchanged. Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I will feel free to attack musk, didn't need your permission but thanks!

    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60’s tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy’s goal of humans on the moon first). There’s no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Only if you could link the fact that Musk is on horse drugs with the fact that Starship explodes.
    The starting point was that I dismissed the point that Musk is ruining SpaceX (since Starship's test are not that good) and the fact that he is on drugs.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    I don't see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.
    What I can see from here is that Musk is doing the right thing (trying to make the government more efficient and cheaper) using a completely wrong method, to which I agree.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he’s distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he’d step down.

    I don't think it could do it anymore, at least not to the level you think.

    Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I am not sure. What I think from here (Europe) is that, as I said, Musk is doing the right thing in the wrong (very wrong) way if we speak about DOGE. If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don't seems to do that bad after all.

  • When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60’s tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy’s goal of humans on the moon first). There’s no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Only if you could link the fact that Musk is on horse drugs with the fact that Starship explodes.
    The starting point was that I dismissed the point that Musk is ruining SpaceX (since Starship's test are not that good) and the fact that he is on drugs.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    I don't see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.
    What I can see from here is that Musk is doing the right thing (trying to make the government more efficient and cheaper) using a completely wrong method, to which I agree.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he’s distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he’d step down.

    I don't think it could do it anymore, at least not to the level you think.

    Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I am not sure. What I think from here (Europe) is that, as I said, Musk is doing the right thing in the wrong (very wrong) way if we speak about DOGE. If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don't seems to do that bad after all.

    I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish. This dickwad said "the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy".

    If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don’t seems to do that bad after all.

    haha tesla is cratering in the EU and that cybertruck sure is a winner. pfft

    You are so detached from reality it's disgusting. This discussion has been absolutely pointless.

  • I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish. This dickwad said "the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy".

    If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don’t seems to do that bad after all.

    haha tesla is cratering in the EU and that cybertruck sure is a winner. pfft

    You are so detached from reality it's disgusting. This discussion has been absolutely pointless.

    I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    And incidentally SpaceX is the only US entity to have a ship certified for human flight. Where is the Dragon's equivalent of NASA ? Or any other company/state agency.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish.

    An agency created in the 1960's to fight URSS influence. Maybe it is time to let it go and start with something else, don't you think ?
    Or maybe it is time that US start to think that without everyone else it is nothing and begin to be an reliable ally and not one that can change idea every 2 years.

    This dickwad said “the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy”.

    To be honest, empathy is something you should be aware of after a certain point.

    But whatever...

  • A strawman is when somebody mischaracterize an argument, calling someone a tankie is not that.

  • And this is relevant how?

  • Anthropic's AI is Writing Its Own Blog - Oh Wait. No It's Not

    Technology technology
    4
    67 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    mrjgyfly@lemmy.worldM
    They absolutely will. AI is great if you drastically lower your standards.
  • Welcome to the web we lost

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    181 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    C
    Is it though? Its always far easier to be loud and obnoxious than do something constructive, even with the internet and LLMs, in fact those things are amplifiers which if anything make the attention imbalance even more drastic and unrepresentative of actual human behaviour. In the time it takes me to write this comment some troll can write a dozen hateful ones, or a bot can write a thousand. Doesn't mean humans are shitty in a 1000/1 ratio, just means shitty people can now be a thousand times louder.
  • There's no chance he signs it but I still hope he does

    Technology technology
    15
    1
    36 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    E
    And they've been doing it more blatantly and for longer than most tech companies.
  • 100 Stimmen
    49 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    A
    Okay man.
  • 278 Stimmen
    100 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    F
    It's not just skills, it's also capital investment.
  • Tiny LEDs May Power Future AI Inteconnects

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    8 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 33 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    A
    Phew okay /s
  • CrowdStrike Announces Layoffs Affecting 500 Employees

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    243 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    S
    This is where the magic of near meaningless corpo-babble comes in. The layoffs are part of a plan to aspirationally acheive the goal of $10b revenue by EoY 2025. What they are actually doing is a significant restructuring of the company, refocusing by outside hiring some amount of new people to lead or be a part of departments or positions that haven't existed before, or are being refocused to other priorities... ... But this process also involves laying off 500 of the 'least productive' or 'least mission critical' employees. So, technically, they can, and are, arguing that their new organizational paradigm will be so succesful that it actually will result in increased revenue, not just lower expenses. Generally corpos call this something like 'right-sizing' or 'refocusing' or something like that. ... But of course... anyone with any actual experience with working at a place that does this... will tell you roughly this is what happens: Turns out all those 'grunts' you let go of, well they actually do a lot more work in a bunch of weird, esoteric, bandaid solutions to keep everything going, than upper management was aware of... because middle management doesn't acknowledge or often even understand that that work was being done, because they are generally self-aggrandizing narcissist petty tyrants who spend more time in meetings fluffing themselves up than actually doing any useful management. Then, also, you are now bringing on new, outside people who look great on paper, to lead new or modified apartments... but they of course also do not have any institutional knowledge, as they are new. So now, you have a whole bunch of undocumented work that was being done, processes which were being followed... which is no longer being done, which is not documented.... and the new guys, even if they have the best intentions, now have to spend a quarter or two or three figuring out just exactly how much pre-existing middle management has been bullshitting about, figuring out just how much things do not actually function as they ssid it did... So now your efficiency improving restructuring is actually a chaotic mess. ... Now, this 'right sizing' is not always apocalyptically extremely bad, but it is also essentially never totally free from hiccups... and it increases stress, workload, and tensions between basically everyone at the company, to some extent. Here's Forbes explanation of this phenomenon, if you prefer an explanation of right sizing in corpospeak: https://www.forbes.com/advisor/business/rightsizing/