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

SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

spaceweatherarchive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 231 posts

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#191

Post by acjohnson55 »

sgjohnson wrote: post #173
adhesive_wombat wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be banned anyway. The more we can do to make their operations impossible the better. Their mere existence makes a mockery of the idea of the stock market as a considered reflection of value of companies and explicitly makes it into a gambling den for dead-eyed people competing to have the fastest card counting systems under their suits. If a company is valuable now, it'll be valuable in 5 minutes.

HFTs provide a lot of value to everyone by providing a lot of liquidity and reducing bid/ask spread giving a fairer price to everyone. > If a company is valuable now, it'll be valuable in 5 minutes. That’s not necessarily true.

HFTs turn off their algorithms when the market gets particularly volatile and the liquidity vanishes at the moment it's actually needed.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#193

Post by simondotau »

ciwolsey wrote: post #187
machdiamonds wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla's sales of approximately 4.5 million vehicles have each offset about 20 tons of CO2 over their lifetimes compared to a traditional gas vehicle [1]. This equates to preventing a total of 90 million tons of CO2 from entering our atmosphere. As we continue to transition to renewable energy, the environmental benefits of each Tesla vehicle are set to increase further. In contrast, a SpaceX launch generates around 3…

You pay out your ass for one of Elons cars and he's credited with the carbon footprint benefits. Why should he get all the credit?

For the same reason the carbon footprint of every Elon rocket launch is being attributed to SpaceX even though some other entity "paid out of their ass" for many of them.

Because it takes two to tango. In both cases "all the credit" or "all the debit" goes to the manufacturer for making the product AND the customer for paying for it.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#194

Post by simondotau »

ricardobeat wrote: post #127
ajhurliman wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s honestly astounding you consider them to be distinct

Different eras. Journalism used to be bound by much stricter ethics.

It probably was to some extent. But also true is that readership used to have fewer means to question the writing of journalists, or to learn of others' criticisms.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#195

Post by d_tr »

quailfarmer wrote: post #113
ninjanomnom wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher orbits are slower, not faster. Very low orbits as you say though are less an issue due to atmospheric drag deorbiting debris. A bit higher and debris will stay up much longer, even higher up though and there's so much room we can't possibly put out enough material to fill the orbits yet. The mid point of that scale is the dangerous region.

Higher altitude orbits are slower in angular velocity, but faster in linear velocity, assuming a circular orbit. Faster debris ends up in higher orbit.

Higher altitude circular orbits are slower in linear velocity too. Look it up or work it out by equating the centripetal force with the gravitational attraction, which is the condition for a circular orbit.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#196

Post by sidewndr46 »

adhesive_wombat wrote: post #158
op00to wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about high frequency trading shops?

They should be banned anyway. The more we can do to make their operations impossible the better. Their mere existence makes a mockery of the idea of the stock market as a considered reflection of value of companies and explicitly makes it into a gambling den for dead-eyed people competing to have the fastest card counting systems under their suits. If a company is valuable now, it'll be valuable in 5 minutes.

Have you ever listened to an earnings call? It only takes a few words from CEO or CFO to reduce the value of the traded stock to nearly zero.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#197

Post by sgjohnson »

phpisthebest wrote: post #179
sgjohnson wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HFTs provide a lot of value to everyone by providing a lot of liquidity and reducing bid/ask spread giving a fairer price to everyone. > If a company is valuable now, it'll be valuable in 5 minutes. That’s not necessarily true.

>>HFTs provide a lot of value to everyone I think we are going to have very different views as to what the terms "value" and "everyone" mean because HFT's provide no value at all to the everyday person on mainstreet just looking get by and maybe put 10% of their wages into the stock market for retirement. if by everyone you mean "the top 1%" and by value you mean "make lots of money at the expense of mainstreet inves…

> because HFT's provide no value at all to the everyday person

If you participate in the stock market at all, you indirectly benefit from HFTs lowering the bid/ask spread and therefore getting a better price. Now matter how insignificant, but the benefit is there.

Of course if we're dealing in millions, not thousands, then the benefit is more pronounced, but a couple of cents here or there still make a difference.

At the very worst HFT firms are a net neutral.

> "make lots of money at the expense of mainstreet investors"

Can you elaborate on this further? I don't see how HFTs make money at the expense of mainstreet investors. HFTs make money on the expense of inefficiencies, therefore making the markets more efficient.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#198

Post by mistercheph »

rdlw wrote: post #61
idlewords wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that all distinct orbits at the same altitude eventually collide.

What do you mean? If they're both circular orbits, they'll have the same period, so they'll never collide—they'll always be on opposite sides of the Earth. In fact, this goes for any two orbits with identical periods.

Perfect, well, when they have circular orbits we’ll give you a call.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#199

Post by panick21_ »

kergonath wrote: post #151
machdiamonds wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I wonder how many times over Tesla makes up for it.

You would be surprised. It takes several years for the low emissions of an EV to compensate the increased emissions during fabrication compared to ICEs (and disposal: ICEs are mostly steel and plastic, with fewer fancy chemicals as batteries). Teslas, being large and heavy, also use way more energy than they should to move around 100 kgs of human. Energy that is not free of GHG emissions. EVs are mostly good over the…

EV are heavier but more efficent because electric motors are more efficent.

Re: SpaceX punched a hole in the ionosphere

#200

Post by panick21_ »

Kerb_ wrote: post #138
machdiamonds wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I wonder how many times over Tesla makes up for it.

The harm they cause to public transportation (such as politically stalling rail systems with Hyperloop) outweighs the good they do with their cars, especially now that car companies that don't directly hurt more efficient forms of transport are making electric cars. And self driving taxis, if they ever do make it which is still waaaaay out even by Elon time, are not going to balance it out.

The idea that Hyperloop had any impact at all on public transit is just nonsense.

It had literally zero impact on California High-Speed Rail.

Post reply on HN