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

Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

ukfoundations.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 344 posts

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#321

Post by SpecialistK »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #318
SpecialistK wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention the other issue: even if it's easy to get into another city via rail, how do you get from the train station to your final destination? Very few cities have public transit anywhere close to NYC's. Of course flying has the same issue, but the airport has a car rental desk. Or avoid that entirely by driving your own car.

I remember these things called taxis. But I'm an old, and I think they've been replaced by something called "Ubers" and "Lyfts". But don't mind me ...

Which are expensive.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#322

Post by defrost »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #304
defrost wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure whatever minor inconvenience comes to those scientists can be fixed somehow. \1. It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all. \2. Problem started with Starlink 1.0. The fix was Musk promising better shielding and attention to leaks in Version 2.0 and to turn off Starllink sats over Murchison Radio Quiet Area etc. \3. Starlink V2.0 has 30x more noise (Musk lied | didn't deliver) and remains noisy over quiet are…

>It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all. What's your solution? This kind of satellite system is going to get built and improved over time regardless of what you think of it. >It's more due to Musk lying and not delivering. No, it's not. I think you know it too. Biden and a bunch of EU politicians have literally threatened Elon over Twitter, as recently as last month. Everyone was cool with his hype game until they c…

>> It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all.

> What's your solution? This kind of satellite system is going to get built and improved over time regardless of what you think of it.

So you've reversed your " opinion " and tacitly admitted it's more than a a minor inconvenience then?

As I outlined above the solution proposed was that the Ver 2.0 sats be better shielded and set to turn off over Radio Quiet Zones such as the Murchison as discussed and agreed to when this was raised some years back.

>> It's more due to Musk lying and not delivering.

> No, it's not.

Yes. It is. At least so far as the radio telescope community and this Starlink issue is concerned. He made promises and didn't keep them.

> Biden and a bunch of EU politicians ...

Has nothing to do with Starlink noise.

> Let's look at Elon's accomplishments objectively.

Sure. He promised to fix Starlink noise. He did not. He delivered a Ver 2.0 that's noisier than the the first.

He promised Full Self Driving cars "next year" for a decade. Still hasn't happened.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#323

Post by defrost »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #320
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2nd generation of starlink satellites is worse than the first one: they leak radio spectrum energy at a massively higher level than the 1st generation. Why have sympathy for anyone trying to do something stupid? Why do we need autonomous taxis? What problem is this solving, other than helping the already richer get a bit richer?

IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons. In any case, satellites have long existed and other countries are going to build their own version of Starlink with the same problems. If they don't have the same problems then presumably Starlink will learn from them. There are other satellites made to observe stuff from space, and maybe the new SpaceX rockets will facilita…

> IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons.

That's your opinion. It's wrong.

There is a list of papers as long as an arm going back to the start of Starlink that measure the noise spectrum and point out exactly why it's a real problem for pre existing programs that have had billions invested in new science programs.

There are proposed work arounds which have been ignored.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#324

Post by wakawaka28 »

defrost wrote: post #322
wakawaka28 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all. What's your solution? This kind of satellite system is going to get built and improved over time regardless of what you think of it. >It's more due to Musk lying and not delivering. No, it's not. I think you know it too. Biden and a bunch of EU politicians have literally threatened Elon over Twitter, as recently as last month. Everyone was cool with his hype game until they c…

>> It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all. > What's your solution? This kind of satellite system is going to get built and improved over time regardless of what you think of it. So you've reversed your " opinion " and tacitly admitted it's more than a a minor inconvenience then? As I outlined above the solution proposed was that the Ver 2.0 sats be better shielded and set to turn off over Radio Quiet Zones such as t…

>So you've reversed your " opinion " and tacitly admitted it's more than a a minor inconvenience then?

No I didn't. I heard about some noise a long time ago and it did not sound like a devastating development. I am merely putting forward a conditional argument: If the noise is a problem, then the problem will likely affect other satellites which are already being built. In any case I expect the problem to be solved.

>Yes. It is. At least so far as the radio telescope community and this Starlink issue is concerned. He made promises and didn't keep them.

I was not aware of these promises. Without context I cannot say whether he had a legitimate reason to not implement that proposed solution. Can you at least admit there might be a technical reason for it to not be done?

>he promised[...]

He does tend to promise more than he delivers but nobody has delivered better satellite internet, EVs, or autonomous driving to the public. Your gripes are extremely uncharitable.

Again I must point out that Elon's habit of overhyping things was well-tolerated by all for years, until he revealed views slightly to the right of the most extreme leftists and questioned their pet issues. Then the media and all liberals acted like he's the devil. I have a coworker who has been affected by this propaganda campaign. He is extremely environmentally conscious, yet refuses to buy anything from an Elon company. He will not buy a Tesla despite the fact they are practically the best and most proven EVs on the market. Instead he bought a Leaf or something, which is objectively worse than a Tesla. This mentality is totally irrational and I would say un-American. But this bad attitude is common, unfortunately.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#325

Post by wakawaka28 »

defrost wrote: post #323
wakawaka28 wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons. In any case, satellites have long existed and other countries are going to build their own version of Starlink with the same problems. If they don't have the same problems then presumably Starlink will learn from them. There are other satellites made to observe stuff from space, and maybe the new SpaceX rockets will facilita…

> IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons. That's your opinion . It's wrong. There is a list of papers as long as an arm going back to the start of Starlink that measure the noise spectrum and point out exactly why it's a real problem for pre existing programs that have had billions invested in new science programs. There are proposed work arounds which have been i…

>That's your opinion. It's wrong.

Unless you are actively working on this issue I will consider your opinion no more valid than mine. There may be papers about the issue but that does not in itself prove how bad the issue is. I don't have time to find and read "a list of papers as long as an arm" anyway and I would bet good money that you didn't read them either.

>There are proposed work arounds which have been ignored.

Do you know if there is a legitimate technical reason why those might not have been implemented? Will any of those billions going to radio astronomy go toward reengineering the technical marvel that is Starlink? Doesn't the FCC inspect and approve all of our privately-owned satellites?

I'm not an astronomer or a rocket scientist but it seems to me that emitting continuous "noise" aka a radio signal is fundamental to the operation of satellite internet on such a scale. You don't have to respond with another pompous "Nah uh" because I don't care anymore.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#326

Post by benjaminwootton »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #272
dash2 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I've been to my GP half a dozen times in the last year, always same day. Good for you, but I think that is absolutely not the typical UK experience.

It is for us. Our surgery has a triage system where you phone in the morning and if you need an appointment you get it the same day. I don't think it's that uncommon. The problems are mostly concentrated in the poorer areas where they struggle to attract staff.

We have to call at 8am along with the hordes. If your call isn’t answered by 8.05am then you are out of luck. If you eventually do get through then you’ll be given an appointment with a “nurse practitioner” in a weeks time. I’ve heard about these things called GPs but haven’t personally confirmed their existence.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#327

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #324
defrost wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> It's not a "minor inconvenience" at all. > What's your solution? This kind of satellite system is going to get built and improved over time regardless of what you think of it. So you've reversed your " opinion " and tacitly admitted it's more than a a minor inconvenience then? As I outlined above the solution proposed was that the Ver 2.0 sats be better shielded and set to turn off over Radio Quiet Zones such as t…

>So you've reversed your " opinion " and tacitly admitted it's more than a a minor inconvenience then? No I didn't. I heard about some noise a long time ago and it did not sound like a devastating development. I am merely putting forward a conditional argument: If the noise is a problem, then the problem will likely affect other satellites which are already being built. In any case I expect the problem to be solved.…

"Nobody has delivered better ...." is not a reason to be less negative towards Musk. Because somebody manages to do a quality-but-fundamentally-problematic job on satellite internet, a generally OK but quality-plagued job on EVs and a basically useless job on autonomous driving that nobody wanted does not mean they are exempt from criticism or griping.

It is extremely American to use commerce for political ends.

Boycotting people with political views you find problematic is as American as apple pie (and actually, maybe more so). The right and the left do it, and have done for ages.

His hype was well-tolerated by the people you read and listen to, perhaps, but in the stuff I read he's been criticized for more than a decade for his empty bullshit. Tesla also lots of issues with their cars, more than most other EV makes, but it is true that they do have more time in the market and have done some cool stuff.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#328

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #320
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2nd generation of starlink satellites is worse than the first one: they leak radio spectrum energy at a massively higher level than the 1st generation. Why have sympathy for anyone trying to do something stupid? Why do we need autonomous taxis? What problem is this solving, other than helping the already richer get a bit richer?

IMO the Starlink interference problem is being overblown to spite Elon for political reasons. In any case, satellites have long existed and other countries are going to build their own version of Starlink with the same problems. If they don't have the same problems then presumably Starlink will learn from them. There are other satellites made to observe stuff from space, and maybe the new SpaceX rockets will facilita…

> Stop hating on people who make money. They are what funds everyone's pensions after all.

I was the 2nd employee at Amazon. It's not like I hate people who make money. And people making money is not what funds everyone's pensions, other than in some glib 8th grade sort of way.

Do feel free to continue on with your defense of incredibly rich people who don't actually give a damn about any of the things you do and do not need your assistance.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#329

Post by ninalanyon »

cherrycherry98 wrote: post #273
schmidtleonard wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their agenda is to frame the self-serving interests of a very narrow group as the economic interests of everyone. That's shady.

Depending on the specifics, that sounds congruent with some of Adam Smith's economic theories so it's not surprising to see such arguments used, especially if some of the authors are from the Adam Smith Institute. His whole invisible hand metaphor is about society advancing as a whole from agents acting in their self interest. It's more likely a sincerely held belief than an attempt at misdirection.

Adam Smith is probably spinning in his grave.

> His whole invisible hand metaphor is about society advancing as a whole from agents acting in their self interest.

That theory is predicated on the market being composed of buyers and sellers of broadly similar financial power. This is no longer the case in most markets, certainly not in the UK as far as ordinary people or most small companies are concerned.

Re: Foundations: Why Britain Has Stagnated

#330

Post by ninalanyon »

throwaway48540 wrote: post #262
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being elected doesn't remove your obligations to follow sane, moral policies.

That's my point. Crazy economists are not responsible for the damage, it's the elected people who listened to them and followed through. To create an intentionally extreme parallel, imagine they have chosen a group of idk, satanists. Would you blame the group of satanists for being satanists, or the people in charge of a country who contacted a group of satanists for advice?

Surely you blame both? Being consistently evil and living up (or down?) to ones reputation for evil doesn't make one less evil.
Post reply on HN