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

91–100 of 348 posts

Re: Starship Update [video]

#91

Post by giantrobot »

irrational wrote: post #49
rtpg wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do we need to fly 3 months to some inhospitable planet that is in worse condition than Earth would be (even after nuclear wars and global warming) to make progress? I suppose there's an idea we could apply everything done on Mars to Earth, but like... seriously, what we just took all the prep for mars and just put it in the middle of the Empty Quarter, the Saraha, Antarctica? People barely want to live in the arc…

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.

> We are one asteroid strike away from losing all human life on earth.

We're one asteroid strike from losing all human life in the solar system even if you had a bunch of people living on Mars. It would take a very long time to get even a single Mars colony self sufficient. Without resources of Earth supporting the colony it would die out the first time the air conditioner broke.

Putting people on Mars isn't putting our eggs in a second basket. It's putting an egg in a wet napkin on a mouse trap positioned under a precariously balanced boulder.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#92

Post by kortex »

irrational wrote: post #6

This is the first time I’ve ever heard him speak. Is he always this awkward? Based off of the 5 minutes I watched, he clearly hasn’t gotten to where he is through charisma and public speaking skills. I’m just wondering if this is typical for him. Also, a million tons to Mars? If each starship lifts 100 tons, that is 10,000 launches. I think he said launch windows only come around every 2 years. He is either planning…

Settling Mars is gonna be some multi-generational Bene Gesserit long term thinking shit. In fact when he dies I hope someone else takes up his obsession with Mars or bust. Settling North America took decades. It's like that, except you need a minimum tech tree to even just breathe and grow potatoes.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#93

Post by pverghese »

flyt wrote: post #37
pageandrew wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh, but they are. The average westerner (in the US, at least) is a $400 unexpected bill away from bankruptcy. Also, Musk was not a founder of Tesla.

Don't buy an iPhone you'll be 1000 less away from bankruptcy

Re: Starship Update [video]

#94

Post by more_corn »

Supermancho wrote: post #57
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.

> The basic idea is to not have all your eggs in one basket. A moon base is the precursor to a base on Mars and having humans get anywhere near Mars in the next 50 years (if they return or not) is a PR stunt.

Planning for mars is making the moon shot significantly better. Starship can basically replace the whole complicated and expensive orbiter lander situation with a fast, cheap, reusable craft with a fantastic payload capacity. That craft is being designed and built with Mars in mind. It’s also going to be fantastically useful for other things.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#95

Post by fastball »

sfblah wrote: post #40
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…

And then what? What's the use case?

Moon colonies, mars colonies, space stations in orbit for science, space stations for leisure, space stations for industry. Shipyards for building bigger spaceships in orbit. Mining asteroids. Etc.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#96

Post by Someone »

SECProto wrote: post #52
sillysaurusx wrote: post #5

"It's gonna be cramped, dangerous, difficult, very hard work. You might die." -- Elon's sales pitch for Mars, in his own words. I wonder if any billionaire (or their children) will be doing the early work. It's an interesting game of "Who values their life the least?" knowing that their sacrifice will make for a better future. Of course, it's not a foregone conclusion that there will be a disaster. But over the cours…

Somewhere around a thousand Americans [1] lose their lives in the construction industry each year. It's not a novel thing for people to die building the future, but Mars would definitely bring some novel methods. [1] https://midwestepi.org/2017/05/08/construction-fatalities-co...

Mars in the first years (probably for decades) will likely be way worse.

Workers will spend all 24 hours of every day in risky circumstances, and the quality of aid will be worse. For example, even if there is a MRI machine, will there be surgeons? A small population simply cannot support a wide range of medical specialists.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#97

Post by sfblah »

thecrumb wrote: post #3

You'd think someone with Elon's money would spend a few bucks on a public speaking course on Udemy or something.

I may not agree with all of his ideas, but I find his speaking style just fine. Honestly, I prefer someone who reaches for words but says what he means to say.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#98

Post by ameister14 »

anonporridge wrote: post #29
pageandrew wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> birth lottery There are plenty of people born into more favorable conditions than Elon Musk, who haven’t had 1/10,000th of the success that he has had.

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.

That's a pretty small group of people to start with.

Apparently there have been only nine people between 1750 and 1950 worth over $100 billion dollars. (Wikipedia, so who knows) Of them, 6 were not born into privilege:

Cornelius Vanderbilt, Stephen Girard, John D. Rockefeller, Carnegie, John Jakob Astor, and Henry Ford.

Including the modern era adds another 9, only 2 of which were not born into privilege - Larry Ellison and Jeff Bezos. You could argue definition of privilege and add Sergey Brin in there maybe.

So depending on your definition of privilege and 'massive success,' you might be only just correct, with 10/18 people worth over $100 billion in the last 250 years or so coming from privilege.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#99

Post by fastball »

flyt wrote: post #37
pageandrew wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh, but they are. The average westerner (in the US, at least) is a $400 unexpected bill away from bankruptcy. Also, Musk was not a founder of Tesla.

> Also, Musk was not a founder of Tesla.

Lawsuit says otherwise.

Re: Starship Update [video]

#100

Post by mmmm2 »

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.

Mars is difficult of course, but it does have resources. You can get water, oxygen, rocket fuel, various ores, etc. It's also not a vacuum, and there are places where the temperature profile is vaguely similar to Earth.

None of that is true in space, unless you're thinking of something I'm not, but like another poster has said, none of this is zero sum. The technology developed to try to settle on mars can be devoted to building large, habitable objects in space if people think that's a better plan. We should also have a moon base, etc. etc.

Post reply on HN