31–40 of 275 posts
Without getting too spaced-out with the the Bezos-Musk dynamics, I personally hate the idea of having private companies getting on the SpaceX bandwagon and clogging up outer space with thousands of satellites.
A good friend of Bezos' (like his brother maybe) needs to pull him aside and tell him how pathetic and sad this tactic is making him look. He's ruining his reputation among people he needs to recruit, like engineers, who might not otherwise fall for the false Bezos-is-mustache-twirling-capitalist narrative. Bezos actually seems to be a fairly good person with good motivations in general. But he's also extremely compe…
Honestly, I think the main difference between Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos is their PR. Elon Musk portrays himself as an affable nerd who posts memes on Twitter, whereas Bezos has forgone a hair transplant and embraced the Lex Luthor look. In the early days of SpaceX, they filed a lawsuit asking the government to dismantle the company that was their main competitor for EELV[1] and no one blinked an eye. I don't think it…
See https://qz.com/emails/space-business/2049413/ .
Blue Origin is just rolling rocks downhill on the enemy camp, hoping to get lucky. Because hey, it's easier than putting payloads into orbit, right? They need to lead, follow, or GTFO the way.
A good friend of Bezos' (like his brother maybe) needs to pull him aside and tell him how pathetic and sad this tactic is making him look. He's ruining his reputation among people he needs to recruit, like engineers, who might not otherwise fall for the false Bezos-is-mustache-twirling-capitalist narrative. Bezos actually seems to be a fairly good person with good motivations in general. But he's also extremely compe…
I also question whether he has "good motivations." He wanted to dominate commerce. Not just books, but everything sold. This is not a good motivation and Amazon should be getting busted up.
I disdain the owners of both but Bezos (fairly) seems to get a bit more ire here. The Verge’s piece elaborated that SpaceX hasn’t decided between two configurations and want approval for both even though they will only choose one, so everyone else has to plan around two different configurations. I’m not sure if that’s standard procedure but it does seem a bit unfair to add double work for everyone else.
It's a bit of a stretch to say they haven't decided; one depends on Starship being approved for launch (and working) in the right timeframe, and the other just uses Falcon 9s. I don't think regulators should force companies to be conservative in unrelated technical development when it doesn't have any material impact on others.
The Starlink constellations in this proposal are large, and any future development by others will have to account for the orbits of these potential constellations.
That's 30k new objects to plan for, and with two configurations at play, that means accounting for essentially 60k objects in motion, effectively doubling the work someone would have to do to plan their deployments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honestly, I think the main difference between Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos is their PR. Elon Musk portrays himself as an affable nerd who posts memes on Twitter, whereas Bezos has forgone a hair transplant and embraced the Lex Luthor look. In the early days of SpaceX, they filed a lawsuit asking the government to dismantle the company that was their main competitor for EELV[1] and no one blinked an eye. I don't think it…
The SpaceX lawsuit against Kistler was nothing like the Blue Origin efforts to kneecap SpaceX. They were fighting for survival in a biased competitive environment against a lazy, unproductive, but politically-connected rival. See https://qz.com/emails/space-business/2049413/ . Blue Origin is just rolling rocks downhill on the enemy camp, hoping to get lucky. Because hey, it's easier than putting payloads into orbit,…
Contract protests are pretty common, although they don't always make it to the Court of Federal Claims. OTOH, filing a lawsuit saying that the government should shut down another launch provider even when you're not competing for the same contracts (yet) seems like more of a kneecapping effort. Like I said, SpaceX and ULA both filed lawsuits before they ever made it to orbit so I don't think that criticism applies exclusively to one company.
I disdain the owners of both but Bezos (fairly) seems to get a bit more ire here. The Verge’s piece elaborated that SpaceX hasn’t decided between two configurations and want approval for both even though they will only choose one, so everyone else has to plan around two different configurations. I’m not sure if that’s standard procedure but it does seem a bit unfair to add double work for everyone else.
I'll take the eccentric billionaire actually tackling real issues and making actual headway. People here are too narrow minded and have quarter to quarter short term memory disorder, seeming to forget that Musk and Tesla are the sole reason we have had the progress and momentum towards actually greener technologies, not simply greenwashed corporate nonsense that was churned out year after year without any was actual…
Without getting too spaced-out with the the Bezos-Musk dynamics, I personally hate the idea of having private companies getting on the SpaceX bandwagon and clogging up outer space with thousands of satellites.
If they're on LEO, what's the big deal? Starlink's satellites have a lifetime of around 10 years before they get pulled back into the atmosphere by gravity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit of a stretch to say they haven't decided; one depends on Starship being approved for launch (and working) in the right timeframe, and the other just uses Falcon 9s. I don't think regulators should force companies to be conservative in unrelated technical development when it doesn't have any material impact on others.
But it does have material impact on others. The Starlink constellations in this proposal are large, and any future development by others will have to account for the orbits of these potential constellations. That's 30k new objects to plan for, and with two configurations at play, that means accounting for essentially 60k objects in motion, effectively doubling the work someone would have to do to plan their deploymen…