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

SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 839 posts

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#791

Post by piokoch »

mumblemumble wrote: post #558
wongarsu wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the ISS you can produce higher quality optical fiber than on earth [1]. A demonstration fabrication unit is already on the ISS, and NASA has recently published prices for using the ISS for commercial tasks such as this. I suspect many other manufacturing methods can also benefit from zero gravity, and as launch costs drop more of these will be explored. 1: https://upward.issnationallab.org/the-race-to-manufacture-…

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

Wait until some HFT investors will step up to buy such fiber cable to be microseconds faster than competition. Those $3000/kg could turn out to be a small change.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#792

Post by nicoburns »

scottLobster wrote: post #779
nicoburns wrote: post #773

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it benefit society though? I'd argue that increased liquidity in markets is a net negative. That means it's easier for investors to sell their assets quickly, which is exactly what you don't want if you want to encourage long-term investment.

People buy and flip houses, despite the fact that it takes months. What timeline would you think would discourage short-term investment? Ultimately I'd rather place the responsibility for long/short term investing on the investor. The fact that most retail investors should be investing passively and long term is well known at this point, the issue is one of education. Don't dumb down the system when it's easy to make…

> People buy and flip houses, despite the fact that it takes months. What timeline would you think would discourage short-term investment?

Months would be pretty good. But I suspect that wouldn't fly in practice. Flipping houses is long-term investment, no? Even if the asset isn't held for a long time, long-term value is added. This is very different to speculative trading where no value is added.

> The fact that most retail investors should be investing passively and long term is well known at this point

Nope! The primary purpose of the stock markets isn't to generate income for the investors. The purpose is to effectively distribute capital to those business that can use if effectively. Passive investment does not help to achieve this. It reduces the "wisdom of the crowd" effect, because anyone investing passively is not contributing their wisdom.

> Don't dumb down the system when it's easy to make people stronger.

I have completely the opposite view on this. If there's an obviously correct way of doing something, then don't leave it to chance. Design the system so that people can't fail.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#793

Post by oska »

dianastamm wrote: post #790
oska wrote: post #784

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the link. I see from that article that Boeing have commissioned a new customised Airstream van to transport crew out to the Starliner. So looks like responsibility for crew transport to launch is up to the commercial provider and so again, completely sensible for SpaceX to use vehicles from its sister company, as appropriate.

It’s a marketing thing

There is undeniably a marketing angle, yes. But I don't necessarily see this sort of marketing as harmful. Or 'cringeworthy', harking back to your original comment. What I do see as harmful is push advertising and Tesla, rather uniquely, does not do any of that.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#794

Post by protomolecule »

dang wrote: post #231

Other things people have posted, whose threads we've merged hither: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/1266812530833240064 https://techcrunch.com/2020/05/30/spacex-makes-history-with-... https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/05/todays-the-day-weath... If there's a particularly good article, we can swap out the URL above. Edit: beefman suggested the nasa.gov page ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23364975 ), so we'…

"Second freshness - that's what is nonsense! There is only one freshness - the first - and it is also the last. And if sturgeon is of the second freshness, that means it is simply rotten."

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#796

Post by m4rtink »

yellowapple wrote: post #666
mumblemumble wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

How much of that material needs to come from Earth, though? If we can get that from the Moon, for example, then you wouldn't need nearly as much fuel to get the raw materials into orbit for manufacturing. Then all you need to do is get the finished product to wherever it needs to go (e.g. in an atmospheric entry vehicle, or to some other orbital factory, or to some far out colony, or what have you).

Long term - definitely! But to get space manufacturing started in the short term, lowering the launch costs is the best bet.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#797

Post by m4rtink »

borosT wrote: post #632
mumblemumble wrote: post #558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to think about that from the other side, too. Just delivering the raw materials to the manufacturing facility would cost ~$3000/kg (assuming rock bottom SpaceX prices). Based on some loose googling, I think that 1kg of raw material would yield only something on the order of 100m of cable. It looks like a typical 100m fiber optic patch cable retails for about $60. So, there's clearly a lot of value to…

is asteroid mining viable compare to shipping raw material up the earth gravity well?

Definitelly - just has a high startup cost and possibly takes some time to get the material back.

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#799

Post by Haga »

andrepd wrote: post #699
dannyw wrote: post #633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High frequency traders will want the best connectivity humanely possible. It’s a zero sum game. If they can beat a competitor firm’s signals by the smallest fraction of a second, even a nanosecond, they reaps in the profits. So $100m for some better fibre? Go nuts!

Eh, that's a really sad thing to optimise for, don't you think? Revealing of a broken incentive system. I'd prefer if HFT practices were banned.

[dead]

Re: SpaceX successfully launches two humans into orbit

#800

Post by SXX »

chas wrote: post #769
osamagirl69 wrote: post #620

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the time being, they are targeting specialty applications where it is not uncommon to charge in excess of $1000 per meter even for normal earthly fibers. For scaling up, if one uses the smallest commercial fiber standard (80um diameter cladding--they would put the buffer and whatnot on after it comes back to earth) the mass of the fiber is only 53grams/km so using your $3000/kg the cargo cost is only $0.16/meter…

What’s the application of super high-quality earth cable?

That's kind a obvious: high-frequency trading. Thousands of banks and companies will happily to pay premium to get some edge over competitors. As soon as single entity on market have it everyone else would want it as well so there will be plenty of demand.
Post reply on HN