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

Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

781–790 of 879 posts

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#781

Post by m4rtink »

bigiain wrote: post #723
cwkoss wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Makes sense that former-ICBMs that can reach orbital velocity have utility. (Are they still ICBMs if the goal isn't to reach another continent?) I think the deltaV's needed to place a warhead on the surface are significantly less than those needed to put a satellite into low-earth orbit.

If you can lob your warheads into orbit with enough propellant left to accurately deorbit and aim them, you've then 1) got the capability of dropping them anywhere on the planet you choose, and 2) no longer have them sitting vulnerable in the silos and can sit back and choose your retargeting strategy without worrying about whether all your launch facilities will get nuked before you chose which cities to retaliate o…

There has been somethink kinda like that, just not long term orbit:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardme...

The other nuclear powers did not like it and it was scrapped. Not to mention that even if you might get the first shot this way, there will almost certainly be retaliatory strikes back on you.

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#782

Post by m4rtink »

Retric wrote: post #257
aeternum wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did we have fully reusable rockets during the Cold War? Even though it's suborbital, Blue Origin's re-use is still a pretty impressive achievement. Spaceplanes are also interesting tech. Maybe not the best choice for earth but could prove useful on other planets with different atmospheres.

Yes, going back to WWII many aircraft have been reusable rockets. In 1963 the reusable X-15 broke the same 330,000f (100km) barrier at 353,200 ft using a nearly identical approach, 3 aircraft 199 flights, zero crashes. Blue Origin only nominally beat that at 367,490 ft, but was optimized for altitude rather than extreme speeds of the X-15 @ Mach 6.7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_X-15 Blue Origin is an…

Sadly there were X-15 crashes:

"On 15 November 1967, U.S. Air Force test pilot Major Michael J. Adams was killed during X-15 Flight 191 when X-15-3, AF Ser. No. 56-6672, entered a hypersonic spin while descending, then oscillated violently as aerodynamic forces increased after re-entry."

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#783

Post by m4rtink »

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #776
hemloc_io wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's really fair to lump Bezos, Branson, and Musk into the same bucket. Musk, for all his flaws, started an actual rocket company with new and frankly insane tech. Bezos and especially Branson's ventures feel much more like personal vanity projects than something that will actually push space exploration. I mean Blue Origin has been running for 20 years and the best we have from them is flights that wer…

A spaceship is only a vanity item until you actually need it. Who knows when you might need to spend a few years in orbit waiting out a nuclear winter? I’d be interested to see more progress made toward long term space habitats. You don’t need reusable rockets when you don’t plan on coming back anytime soon.

You need reusable rockets and space resources (Moon, asteroids) if you want to do space habitats at any reasonable scale.

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#784

Post by m4rtink »

WA wrote: post #761
fighterpilot wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just about the sun dying out. A large asteroid could strike at any time and wipe us out. If that is going to happen on Earth with probability p and we make it to Mars then our chances of going extinct due to that cause shrinks to less than p -squared (it's less than p -squared because Mars is smaller than Earth), which is many orders of magnitude smaller than p . Diversification is extremely important to our…

Still, it makes sense to take the chances for another 500 years, work on making our lives on planet Earth more habitable and sustainable and then invest in space faring tech. The chances of being wiped out by a super volcano or asteroid impact over the next 500 years until we solved the sustainable energy problem and a stable ecosystem are rather small.

This is very dangerous thinking - we have the technological window of opportunity now and we need to use it NOW to get space infrastructure working.

We might not have the option in 500 years, even if nothing big wipes us out till then, there could be less serious catastrophes destroying our ability to do spaceflight damning our descendants to inescapable destruction.

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#785

Post by hoseja »

patd wrote: post #752
cwkoss wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither Bezos or Branson achieved orbital velocities, which is the minimum bar for doing useful things related to space. It really is just a carnival ride - it's not about who's in it, its that they didn't actually achieve anything: what they built has no utility except as a dick-measuring contest. Orbit is a little bit of upwards velocity and a whole lot of sideways velocity. They only did the much simpler former. T…

Isn’t part of the VG business plan to sell cheaper zero gravity time for small experiments ? At least cheaper than going to actual space and longer than using parabolic flights in planes.

Look up "vomit comet".

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#786

Post by skywal_l »

fighterpilot wrote: post #620
sofixa wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's how we get to the moon and Mars and how we survive as a species. It's what's next. I find it extremely weird that people are banking on a (almost literal) moonshot for the survival of our species. Isn't trying to stop/lessen the damage we're doing to the place we currently live and which can sustain us better and more optimistic proposition than hoping a metric shitton of things go perfectly after probably mil…

This anti-space exploration position is basically a meme now and is so unoriginal and tiresome. Where's your anger when it comes to movie development, international tourism, stadium construction, the cosmetics industry, and the rest of the endless list of nonsense that is more wasteful and less beneficial than allocating a tiny proportion of Earth's resources towards rocket tech? I hope to hear this cynical take when…

It's a strawman argument.

I don't think people are against space exploration.

When a dude alone can finance a space program it creates two moral issues:

1. How come a guy who make people pee in bottles have enough money for this?

2. Should space exploration be privatized this way.

Of course, you can see no evil here, but that's different from caricaturing legitimate arguments.

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#787

Post by m4rtink »

ModernMech wrote: post #513
ghostbrainalpha wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's seems pretty unlikely now. But what about once the Mar's colony has been established and growing for 300 years+ ?

What makes you so sure that within 300 years, the Mars colony won't become an existential threat with interplanetary nuclear weapons pointed our way? They may even take to calling themselves "Martians" as generations live and die on Mars with little connection to Earth. Like any civilization they'll have their own language, culture, and values. The British colonized America in 1607 and 170 years later those colonists…

Could become super handy if aggressive aliens happen to arrive. ;-)

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#788

Post by andrepd »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #694
andrepd wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and perhaps that might be a problem, don't you think?

I've yet to see a practical alternative to market based pricing that doesn't require rewiring humans at a massive scale.

Markets ≠ Capitalism

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#789

Post by mewpmewp2 »

lasc4r wrote: post #748
yupper32 wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sounds like making the wrong investment. It's not the wrong investment. It's a different investment. Other billionaires are working on some of the problems on your list, too, if that makes you feel better. The most prominent one being Bill Gates. He's working on the "we lose millions a year to disease" portion of your list. Do you hate on Bill Gates because he isn't solving world peace ("fighting wars" on your list…

>Other billionaires are working on some of the problems on your list, too, if that makes you feel better. The most prominent one being Bill Gates. He's working on the "we lose millions a year to disease" portion of your list. Do you hate on Bill Gates because he isn't solving world peace ("fighting wars" on your list)? Relying on the goodwill of billionaires is a problem. >We need to push forward now to have a chance…

You can and should do multiple things at once, to make sure all bases are covered.

Focusing on one thing solely doesn't necessarily make it even faster to solve due to diminishing returns.

You can argue against any action, any person does that you should be helping the poor and hungry instead --- or build sustainable energy. Are you constantly helping the poor, diseased and the hungry? 24/7 of your time?

Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres

#790

Post by mewpmewp2 »

joe_the_user wrote: post #601
aylmao wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Earth is going to die one day. [...] If we wish to ensure the long-term survival of the only intelligent life in the universe that we know about (as well as the survival of all the other creatures on Earth, who don't have our knowledge) then adapting, exploring, and surviving in space is what we must do. I think that's the gripe. We all wish to ensure our long-term survival, but worrying about becoming a multi-…

Yeah, the idea that current space initiatives have relationship to preserving humans from the destruction of earth is ridiculous and contemptable. Even an incredibly polluted earth experiencing runaway global is going to remain less hostile than anywhere else for a long time. And that's not saying the species would survive on such an earth.

What? That is exactly the relationship and the goal.
Post reply on HN