Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 95 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#71

Post by ksec »

mothsonasloth wrote: post #8

I am a sci-fi enthusiast like Bezos, however he seems to cherry pick the themes that he likes to apply to himself and Amazon e.g. driving mankind towards the stars and solving energy crises. There are however plenty of dystopian concepts in science fiction which his company seem to be propelling us toward: * Compression of labour wages by replacing/augmenting with robots. * Building an evil mega-corp (think Tyrell, L…

> * Encouraging consumerism and subsequent pollution.

I am sorry I dont follow.

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#72

Post by MiguelFCA »

sverige wrote: post #17
Infinitesimus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> greedy, power-mad megalomaniac Why do you think that of him?

With his Amazon warehouses, for most of his employees he's created the terrible future of poverty and misery that he allegedly dreams of saving humanity from with his space colonies. And his success isn't built on any innovation other than relentlessly keeping as much as he can for himself.

Hey Sverige,

I have been working for Amazon for over 2 years and I dont live in poverty or misery. In fact, thanks to my pay at Amazon (2x the minimum wage in my area) I can live quite comfortably. Thanks to my job I dont stress out when I think about my student loans. And thanks to the innovation which was implemented with robots, my job is a lot easier that what it would be without the assistance of the electronics we use.

- Miguel FC Ambassador

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#73

Post by K0SM0S »

DuskStar wrote: post #66
K0SM0S wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best advocate of that I could find is Isaac Arthur on YouTube[1]. He explains it so well, including why a technology-advanced civilization (not much more than us) would see an asteroid coming straight to earth as a great economic opportunity to mine lots of stuff. Nowhere near a problem. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZFipeZtQM5CKUjx6grh54g

> see an asteroid coming straight to earth as a great economic opportunity to mine lots of stuff. I hope he didn't actually say that, because it would betray a rather fundamental mistake in space travel - that of distance vs delta v.

Would you care to explain?

His idea is simple: an asteroid is but a huge pile of resources, so instead of having to go e.g. to the belt and back (that's the major cost for space mining, especially from Earth to there — out of our gravity well), you essentially get a 'freebee' coming right to you. With enough tech, you can mine it and shrink it enough it's not even a hazard for earth, or deviate it enough to put it into orbit or slingshot it towards a handy location, whatever. It's rare enough an event (65 million years and counting?) that it would be a nice space-candy for a budding space civilization.

In such a slightly more advanced civilization, you'd see news like "Space corporations get ready as major asteroid coming towards Earth is expected to yield x tons of useful materials, equivalent to n billion dollars saved compared to belt mining." Not to mention asteroids coming from beyond our system could contain exotic materials scarcely found around here.

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#74

Post by DuskStar »

K0SM0S wrote: post #73
DuskStar wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> see an asteroid coming straight to earth as a great economic opportunity to mine lots of stuff. I hope he didn't actually say that, because it would betray a rather fundamental mistake in space travel - that of distance vs delta v.

Would you care to explain? His idea is simple: an asteroid is but a huge pile of resources, so instead of having to go e.g. to the belt and back (that's the major cost for space mining, especially from Earth to there — out of our gravity well), you essentially get a 'freebee' coming right to you. With enough tech, you can mine it and shrink it enough it's not even a hazard for earth, or deviate it enough to put it in…

Going to a near-earth asteroid and back takes time, but not delta v - or at least not nearly as much. There are thousands of asteroids within 8km/s of LEO [0], but the average asteroid on a collision course with earth will arrive with a velocity of ~17km/s (Or at least 10km/s from LEO).

Basically, with a near earth asteroid you can make a Hohmann transfer there, mine the nice stuff, and a Hohmann transfer back home - and you can make sure to pick a platinum-iridium asteroid, or whatever it is that's most valuable. With an asteroid on a collision course, you probably won't have the years to spare to take such an efficient transfer, and you have to move the entire thing away from its collision course.

A valuable asteroid with a 10,000,000km-class intercept a decade out might be really, really convenient. But most potential impactors aren't that friendly.

> Not to mention asteroids coming from beyond our system could contain exotic materials scarcely found around here.

Well, rare-earth minerals are called that for a reason - they're rare on Earth. Platinum-iridium asteroids are nice! But that doesn't require coming from outside our solar system.

0: https://www.asterank.com/

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#75

Post by K0SM0S »

DuskStar wrote: post #74
K0SM0S wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you care to explain? His idea is simple: an asteroid is but a huge pile of resources, so instead of having to go e.g. to the belt and back (that's the major cost for space mining, especially from Earth to there — out of our gravity well), you essentially get a 'freebee' coming right to you. With enough tech, you can mine it and shrink it enough it's not even a hazard for earth, or deviate it enough to put it in…

Going to a near-earth asteroid and back takes time , but not delta v - or at least not nearly as much. There are thousands of asteroids within 8km/s of LEO [0], but the average asteroid on a collision course with earth will arrive with a velocity of ~17km/s (Or at least 10km/s from LEO). Basically, with a near earth asteroid you can make a Hohmann transfer there, mine the nice stuff, and a Hohmann transfer back home…

OK, I see. First of all thanks a lot for this link. Fantastic website!

I genuinely had no idea the delta-v of so many asteroids was so small, compared to LEO. It fills me with 'educated hope', in regards to not-too-distant (in time) sustainable space industry — this and many other factors.

Regarding Isaac Arthur (I'd link the video, but there's so many), he definitely doesn't make that kind of rookie mistake, so I assume it's more of a tongue-in-cheek remark, to address popular concerns and show solutions — drive the point that a space-faring civilization is equipped to deal with such 'problems'.

About rare-Sun materials, I was more implying the possibility of finding isotopes or elements scarce in the belt and inner solar system — but you're right, even just the outer system is already full of useful stuff.

You've convinced me that it does seem pretty improbable that we'd get such a good near-earth candidate during the short window of time when it would really help us a lot, though, assuming we don't take another millennia to get out there (and even then).

Just curious, at the current pace (considering 1950-today) and barring any major stall/setback/boost (no WW3 etc), what would be your personal estimate for the first profitable mining operations? 10, 30, 100 years?

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#76

Post by r00fus »

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #41
mothsonasloth wrote: post #8

I am a sci-fi enthusiast like Bezos, however he seems to cherry pick the themes that he likes to apply to himself and Amazon e.g. driving mankind towards the stars and solving energy crises. There are however plenty of dystopian concepts in science fiction which his company seem to be propelling us toward: * Compression of labour wages by replacing/augmenting with robots. * Building an evil mega-corp (think Tyrell, L…

> * Compression of labour wages by replacing/augmenting with robots. Eliminating work by replacing it with robots is a social good, so long as the lost income is replaced somehow. Bezos is an outspoken proponent of UBI.

UBI proponents tend to see it replacing minimum wage work but the most popular plan to date (Yang) sees it as a replacement for welfare/food stamps and other means-tested support for the poor.

How can it be both?

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#77

Post by DuskStar »

K0SM0S wrote: post #75
DuskStar wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going to a near-earth asteroid and back takes time , but not delta v - or at least not nearly as much. There are thousands of asteroids within 8km/s of LEO [0], but the average asteroid on a collision course with earth will arrive with a velocity of ~17km/s (Or at least 10km/s from LEO). Basically, with a near earth asteroid you can make a Hohmann transfer there, mine the nice stuff, and a Hohmann transfer back home…

OK, I see. First of all thanks a lot for this link. Fantastic website! I genuinely had no idea the delta-v of so many asteroids was so small, compared to LEO. It fills me with 'educated hope', in regards to not-too-distant (in time) sustainable space industry — this and many other factors. Regarding Isaac Arthur (I'd link the video, but there's so many), he definitely doesn't make that kind of rookie mistake, so I as…

> Regarding Isaac Arthur (I'd link the video, but there's so many), he definitely doesn't make that kind of rookie mistake, so I assume it's more of a tongue-in-cheek remark, to address popular concerns and show solutions — drive the point that a space-faring civilization is equipped to deal with such 'problems'.

I guess I should say that there is one other advantage of an asteroid that's already on a collision course - if you can aerocapture instead of doing that propulsively, you only really have to pay the delta v to get to the asteroid in the first place. The problem is that the asteroid might have structural issues that intense acceleration exposes, and that people might be a tad leery of having a large asteroid on a course where if you miss by 100km you kill a billion.

> Just curious, at the current pace (considering 1950-today) and barring any major stall/setback/boost (no WW3 etc), what would be your personal estimate for the first profitable mining operations? 10, 30, 100 years?

I'll say "10 years after we get cheap ($500/kg class) launches" - which might be within the decade, or might be never. I think asteroid mining might still be profitable at far higher launch costs, but the risk and the startup costs would be far higher to the point that it probably won't happen.

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#78

Post by K0SM0S »

DuskStar wrote: post #77
K0SM0S wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, I see. First of all thanks a lot for this link. Fantastic website! I genuinely had no idea the delta-v of so many asteroids was so small, compared to LEO. It fills me with 'educated hope', in regards to not-too-distant (in time) sustainable space industry — this and many other factors. Regarding Isaac Arthur (I'd link the video, but there's so many), he definitely doesn't make that kind of rookie mistake, so I as…

> Regarding Isaac Arthur (I'd link the video, but there's so many), he definitely doesn't make that kind of rookie mistake, so I assume it's more of a tongue-in-cheek remark, to address popular concerns and show solutions — drive the point that a space-faring civilization is equipped to deal with such 'problems'. I guess I should say that there is one other advantage of an asteroid that's already on a collision cours…

> people might be a tad leery of having a large asteroid on a course where if you miss by 100km you kill a billion

Fair point! If unsure, we'd better not play this game too close from home.

> I'll say "10 years after we get cheap ($500/kg class) launches" - which might be within the decade, or might be never. I think asteroid mining might still be profitable at far higher launch costs, but the risk and the startup costs would be far higher to the point that it probably won't happen.

Thank you for sharing that perspective.

One game-changer is to build some sort of structure around or far enough from Earth's gravity (I'm partial to orbital rings); anything that can be built now using earth materials only (at least the basic stages), to kickstart a space industry. Though I suspect there are bigger political and economical challenges than technical ones on the way to cross this upward bound.

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#79

Post by dang »

personjerry wrote: post #53
esotericn wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ha, indeed. It's almost like a weird form of localized entropy reduction. Driving improvements in some areas whilst externalizing damage in others.

[flagged]

Please don't take HN threads further into generic ideological battle. Based on long experience, such discussions become highly predictable and increasingly nasty—the two qualities we're most hoping to avoid here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Jeff Bezos’s Master Plan

#80

Post by gdy »

sverige wrote: post #70
gdy wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have no idea of what poverty and misery are.

Having spent a year homeless on the streets and sometimes on friends' couches, I would say 'Fuck you.' But that would be rude.

That's what I thought. No idea.

And by the way, was that happening while you were working at Amazon?

Post reply on HN