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

Starship Update [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 348 posts

Re: Starship Update [video]

#71

Post by fartcannon »

pageandrew wrote: post #31
anonporridge wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people who achieve massive success are born into privilege. Being able to spend your time studying and getting exposed to cutting edge developments rather than struggling to just survive is a massive advantage. It's largely a necessary, but not sufficient condition for major success. People that rise from nothing to achieve massive success are the exception that prove the rule.

Yes, if someone is struggling to survive, that will limit their ability to become a world-changing entrepreneur. That said, the average westerner is not struggling to survive, and the average westerner does not end up founding 3 world changing companies and amassing a wealth of $200 billion. Not even the average birthright 1%er achieves that.

Its not even that complex. If there was an identical Elon that came one year after Elon, he wouldn't be able to have what Elon has. It's all luck of the draw all the way down.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#72

Post by JaimeThompson »

panick21_ wrote: post #42
belter wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which one of these personalities is he, when making statements about Tesla FSD? Edit: The answer to this question will be highly relevant during the lawsuits that will follow, the first time the Beta FSD kills somebody.

Engineers can never be wrong about anything. Any engineer making any statement that is wrong must be fundamentally evil.

He has been making such statements for 5+ years so I suggest he isn't being an engineer when making them, he is being a PR person.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#73

Post by jowday »

Waterluvian wrote: post #44
kortex wrote: post #34

I love how some folks are like "Elon isn't a real engineer !" and then he starts going on a tangent in the middle of a presser about how flanges are a PITA to seal once you exceed a few hundred bar (just over a few thousand PSI), and how welding improves the plumbing significantly. Like, what!? That's not how C-suite bigwigs talk. That's primo enginerd banter.

I have no opinion to express on Elon but I will say that I’ve heard non-technical managers lap up stuff like that in meetings with the engineers and then regurgitate it elsewhere. If I had to guess his technical competence is somewhere in the middle of the distribution of opinions on the matter. I’m sure he’s fine.

This is definitely the sense I get when I hear him discuss ML.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#74

Post by JaimeThompson »

hparadiz wrote: post #56
rtpg wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISS is literally the most expensive physical structure we have ever built, and it's like 5 floating schoolbuses. Now I'm for walking and chewing bubblegum. But if you believe in opportunity costs and care about navigating that, it feels like the same problem. Our planet becoming irradiated is actually not a huge problem! It would still be easier to live on Earth than on Mars! An irradiated radioactive hellscape o…

The ISS was built largely with hundreds of space shuttle and Soyuz launches over two decades hence why it's so expensive. Starship will be able to put an entire ISS worth of stuff into orbit in a single launch for 1/50th of the cost. It's not a zero sum game. The space industry employs a lot of people. Some of the stuff they put into orbit are satellites that literally save lives.

Starship can't lift 462 tons to orbit in one launch and that isn't taking into account the volume needed. It would take more than 1 to get an ISS equivalent on orbit.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#75

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

garbagetime wrote: post #58
irrational wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic idea is to not have all your eggs in one basket. We are one asteroid strike away from losing all human life on earth. Having 2 habited planets spreads the risk. Obviously having those planets in different solar systems would be even better, but we don’t have the technology for that, yet.

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Our options aren't only (a) live only on Earth, and (b) live on Earth and Mars and potentially other planets. There is, for example, (c) live in man-made structures orbiting the sun at a distance of 1AU, which is debatedly much more sensible than trying to live on Mars.

How many tons would you need to get out of the gravity well before you had enough orbital manufacturing capacity to begin building that sort of thing? I mean, I love the dream, but I don't know how you can make it a reality.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#76

Post by kortex »

garbagetime wrote: post #58
irrational wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The basic idea is to not have all your eggs in one basket. We are one asteroid strike away from losing all human life on earth. Having 2 habited planets spreads the risk. Obviously having those planets in different solar systems would be even better, but we don’t have the technology for that, yet.

You're presenting a false dichotomy. Our options aren't only (a) live only on Earth, and (b) live on Earth and Mars and potentially other planets. There is, for example, (c) live in man-made structures orbiting the sun at a distance of 1AU, which is debatedly much more sensible than trying to live on Mars.

That's true, but there is no fuel source out in space. Outside of Earth orbit, eg Lagrange points, you need fuel deliveries.

On Mars they can make methane with the Sabatier process.

So you have:

- LEO/MEO - vulnerable to asteroid impact ejecta

- GEO/moon/L-points - avoid ejecta, but need regular refueling. If Earth is toast, there goes resupply

- Mars - close enough to the sun for solar, able to conceivably bootstrap in a few centuries

Re: Starship Update [video]

#77

Post by more_corn »

JaimeThompson wrote: post #72
panick21_ wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineers can never be wrong about anything. Any engineer making any statement that is wrong must be fundamentally evil.

He has been making such statements for 5+ years so I suggest he isn't being an engineer when making them, he is being a PR person.

Elon is wrong about FSD being easy and about his approach, and his timeline. If he can be wrong about those things with grace it’ll be fine. I don’t know if he can do that. His track record for admitting he was wrong hasn’t been great.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#79

Post by terafo »

hparadiz wrote: post #56
rtpg wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISS is literally the most expensive physical structure we have ever built, and it's like 5 floating schoolbuses. Now I'm for walking and chewing bubblegum. But if you believe in opportunity costs and care about navigating that, it feels like the same problem. Our planet becoming irradiated is actually not a huge problem! It would still be easier to live on Earth than on Mars! An irradiated radioactive hellscape o…

The ISS was built largely with hundreds of space shuttle and Soyuz launches over two decades hence why it's so expensive. Starship will be able to put an entire ISS worth of stuff into orbit in a single launch for 1/50th of the cost. It's not a zero sum game. The space industry employs a lot of people. Some of the stuff they put into orbit are satellites that literally save lives.

Definitely not in a single launch, since ISS weighs around 500 tons. And I think designs for space stations in starship era would be different(more heavy, but orders of magnitude cheaper to produce), so something like ISS in a starship era might weigh 1.5-2x more(VERY rough estimate), but nonetheless be much cheaper.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#80

Post by chasd00 »

panick21_ wrote: post #33

The Raptor 2 engine is just an absurd. The original specs were already kind of insane. But Raptor 2 is an monster. They really pushed already significantly into a second generation design before first flight. Raptor 2 is not just a slight upgrade, its a huge upgrade. If it can actually launch multiple times a day without any refurbishment, it will simply totally break space travel as we have known it. This engine mak…

I like how small and slender Raptor 2 is compared to Raptor 1. The turbo pump looks even scarier than usual though. It's amazing that something so small is producing 100k HP (the pump turbine).
Post reply on HN