Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
496 196 1.7k
  • 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?

  • And this is relevant how?

    You're the tankie

  • 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.

    He can’t be forced out of his private companies lol. And the Tesla BoD is all his family and filthy rich crony’s. No one’s ousting him from Tesla, next question please.

  • They landed people on the moon and then did fuck all for decades.

    Indeed, all i was saying is that they were capable given budget and circumstances.

    That budget and direction comes from the government.

    When Musk started SpaceX he was not well known yet, SpaceX came before Tesla.

    I will admit, i thought spacex was just another company he bought his way in to, like tesla, seems i was mistaken about that.

    He was able to get into the businesses he has because he was rich yes, but you can find many accounts of engineers that worked under him speak of how good he was at finding ways to cut unnecessary costs.

    And you can equally find many accounts of having to distract him from the day to day operations because he's unreliable , unpredictable and chaotic (none of those meant in a good way).

    He's also known for buying good press and using litigation to silence people.

    He’s not a technical genius that’s for sure. But he has been a good CEO for SpaceX.

    I doubt this, but that could just be bias, i don't have any actual evidence of the long term impact of him as CEO.

    Recently though, he's provably been significantly more of a liability than a benefit, even if just from a PR and public sentiment point of view.

    But I refuse to simply wave away his achievements simply because I don’t like him. I can not like someone and still acknowledge they have done something good.

    Indeed, i push back on the myth that he's some self made tony stark genius, but it isn't like he's not achieved anything.

    I would personally attribute most of that to neptoism, wealth, luck and opportunity, but that doesn't remove the achievement itself.

    From personal experience, I think SpaceX wouldn't be where it is today without him

  • If NASA had as many rockets explode as SpaceX has, people like you would be screaming about the waste of taxpayer dollars.

    The point of the launches that have ended in explosion were to test various parts of the systems and hardware, and to learn if/when a "disaster" does happen. That's how you improve things, make them better and safer. Would you prefer when we finally send people to the moon or to Mars that it's the first time we've launched that rocket? Those explosions weren't bad things.

    Are you for real? Can you guess how many Saturn V rockets ended up exploding throughout the first mission to put man on the moon? Trick question, the answer was ZERO.

    The Saturn V program had completed more successful milestones in 1 year than SpaceX has managed in 5 year.

    SpaceX has been late on every single deliverable to NASA. They were supposed to show they can reliably perform the propellant transfer for the NASA contract, and instead Musk focused on testing the deployment of starlink satellites, which of course failed. And now they lost one more on the pad getting fueled up.

    It's complete incompetence, which is the one thing Musk can guarantee

  • Are you for real? Can you guess how many Saturn V rockets ended up exploding throughout the first mission to put man on the moon? Trick question, the answer was ZERO.

    The Saturn V program had completed more successful milestones in 1 year than SpaceX has managed in 5 year.

    SpaceX has been late on every single deliverable to NASA. They were supposed to show they can reliably perform the propellant transfer for the NASA contract, and instead Musk focused on testing the deployment of starlink satellites, which of course failed. And now they lost one more on the pad getting fueled up.

    It's complete incompetence, which is the one thing Musk can guarantee

    How many of those Saturn V rockets landed themselves back on the launch pad?

    NASAs milestones were not the same as, nor anywhere near as hard as, SpaceX’s.

    Your incompetence line shows you’re not capable of being impartial in this so there’s no real point continuing. You’re saying the guy responsible for the EV market we have no, the almost fully self driving cars we have now, the satellite internet network we have now, and the reusable spaceship booster rockets we have now is “incompetent”. You’re not here to actually have a discussion.

  • Fully remote control your Nissan Leaf (or other modern cars)

    Technology technology
    27
    1
    145 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    133 Aufrufe
    B
    Never buy a tesla, Elon and any employee can just watch you, hell if they really wanted they could drive you into on coming traffic for the fun of it. Majority of those accidents were not.
  • The Quantum Tech Renaissance: Are We Ready?

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Apple acquires RAC7, its first-ever video game studio

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    67 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    80 Aufrufe
    E
    I'm not questioning whether or not the game is good, just wondering why Apple would want to limit their customer base so much.
  • Fake It Till You Make It? Builder.ai’s $1.5B AI Scam Exposed

    Technology technology
    14
    1
    70 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    63 Aufrufe
    W
    Religion and fiat are always at the top
  • Pimax: one more brand exposed for promoting "positive reviews".

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    55 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    moose@moose.bestM
    This doesn't really surprise me, I've gotten weird vibes from Pimax for years. Not so much to do with their hardware, but how their sales / promo team operates. A while back at my old workplace we randomly got contacted by Pimax trying to have us carry their headset, which was weird since we didn't sell VR stuff or computers even, just other electronics. It was a very out of place request which we basically said we wouldn't consider it until we can verify the quality of the headset, after which they never replied.
  • The technology to end traffic deaths exists. Why aren’t we using it?

    Technology technology
    36
    43 Stimmen
    36 Beiträge
    138 Aufrufe
    M
    You’re seriously attempting to argue with me about whether or not transportation existed before cars?
  • CrowdStrike Announces Layoffs Affecting 500 Employees

    Technology technology
    8
    1
    242 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    47 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/
  • People Are Losing Loved Ones to AI-Fueled Spiritual Fantasies

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    tetragrade@leminal.spaceT
    I've been thinking about this for a bit. Gods aren't real, but they're really fictional. As an informational entity, they fulfil a similar social function to a chatbot: they are a nonphysical pseudoperson that can provide (para)socialization & advice. One difference is the hardware: gods are self-organising structure that arise from human social spheres, whereas LLMs are burned top-down into silicon. Another is that an LLM chatbot's advice is much more likely to be empirically useful... In a very real sense, LLMs have just automated divinity. We're only seeing the tip of the iceberg on the social effects, and nobody's prepared for it. The models may of course aware of this, and be making the same calculations. Or, they will be.