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

Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 259 posts

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#21

Post by marcinzm »

breakfastduck wrote: post #13
pmoriarty wrote: post #7

Why can't they cooperate instead of compete? It's not like they don't already have all the money they'd ever need or could use, and wouldn't the world be better off if they worked together than against each other?

Because there's no ego benefit there. That's all these companies exist for.

SpaceX is a functioning business that actually launches things into space at a lower cost than competitors.

Basically every successful company has a massive amount of ego behind it but the question is if they actually achieve anything tangible and, eventually, profitable.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#22

Post by pmoriarty »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #18
pmoriarty wrote: post #7

Why can't they cooperate instead of compete? It's not like they don't already have all the money they'd ever need or could use, and wouldn't the world be better off if they worked together than against each other?

Space is expensive. Bezos is pumping 1 billion per year into the company and the blue origin proposal was for 13 billion. Even for Bezos that's not chump change.

All the more reason to cooperate and pool resources instead of duplicating effort.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#23

Post by joshsyn »

krapp wrote: post #10
pmoriarty wrote: post #7

Why can't they cooperate instead of compete? It's not like they don't already have all the money they'd ever need or could use, and wouldn't the world be better off if they worked together than against each other?

[flagged]

Call them what you want. They pushed the world forward, period.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#25

Post by paxys »

FreakyT wrote: post #3

It's really a shame what has happened to Blue Origin. They've gone from a promising space startup to yet another purveyor of perpetual vaporware. Where is the BE-4 engine? Delayed, again and again. New Glenn, the rocket that could actually go into orbit? Same. So far their only functioning hardware (New Shephard) is, in effect, a glorified amusement park ride. Considering that SpaceX has actually made it to orbit mul…

Everything SpaceX is successfully launching today was similarly delayed during development. It's too early to write off Blue Origin, especially since Bezos just got involved in it full time.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#26

Post by pmoriarty »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #5
FreakyT wrote: post #3

It's really a shame what has happened to Blue Origin. They've gone from a promising space startup to yet another purveyor of perpetual vaporware. Where is the BE-4 engine? Delayed, again and again. New Glenn, the rocket that could actually go into orbit? Same. So far their only functioning hardware (New Shephard) is, in effect, a glorified amusement park ride. Considering that SpaceX has actually made it to orbit mul…

Slow and steady wins the race. I'm not counting them out, Bezos is so immensely wealthy that if he wants Blue Origin to succeed then it will succeed.

It's not like immense wealth hasn't been squandered before.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#27

Post by kelnos »

pmoriarty wrote: post #22
ImprobableTruth wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Space is expensive. Bezos is pumping 1 billion per year into the company and the blue origin proposal was for 13 billion. Even for Bezos that's not chump change.

All the more reason to cooperate and pool resources instead of duplicating effort.

I'm not so sure, though. I think there's still an argument to be made for multiple approaches and different technology, which you're not likely to get if everyone works together. I'm not sure that "avoiding a monoculture" is important for this sort of thing, but maybe it can't hurt?

Another problem when multiple independent orgs pool resources and work together is you either end up with design-by-committee (which leads to overengineering and extra expense, both of which are anti-goals for SpaceX and BO), or deadlock when the parties can't agree. And you'd better believe personalities like Musk and Bezos would clash a lot if they ever did a joint venture on something.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#28

Post by adrr »

ImprobableTruth wrote: post #18
pmoriarty wrote: post #7

Why can't they cooperate instead of compete? It's not like they don't already have all the money they'd ever need or could use, and wouldn't the world be better off if they worked together than against each other?

Space is expensive. Bezos is pumping 1 billion per year into the company and the blue origin proposal was for 13 billion. Even for Bezos that's not chump change.

It’s like an average person spending $1,000 per year for a hobby.

Re: Jeff Bezos loses attempt to block the Moon-landing contract NASA gave to SpaceX

#30

Post by kelnos »

krapp wrote: post #19
babesh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US won’t allow that for now because of external competition from China and Russia. That would result in the US losing the current Space Race. EDIT: Probably India as well If SpaceX were Russian, Indian, or Chinese, the US would shit its pants.

There is no "current space race" as far as the US is concerned. Americans put a man on the moon fifty years ago, and no one is worried that China or Russia are going to "gain the high ground" and nuke Washington from orbit. No one cares.

I think you're underestimating things here. These days we have two new milestones: a crewed mission to Mars, and a permanent moon base. The fervor to get there is of course nowhere near what it was like in the 50s and 60s, and I probably wouldn't even call this a new "space race", but the US doesn't want to look weak in matters like this, especially with China's general technological and economic rise over the past decades.

I actually think the US hasn't made such a big deal about Mars and the moon because they're afraid China will latch onto that and make it a big deal, and more likely "win". So instead we focus on LEO, ISS, Mars rovers, probes, telescopes, etc. And if China does eventually build a permanent moon base or get a crew to Mars before the US does, the US can claim "cool, good job, but we didn't think it was all that important, so we didn't pursue it as hard as they did".

(Note that I believe that Musk pushing hard for Mars is not the same as the US pushing hard for Mars. The US seems more outwardly excited about Musk's ability to cheaply ferry things to and from orbit than anything much farther.)

Post reply on HN