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

Crew-9 Returns to Earth

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 712 posts

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#621

Post by TimTheTinker »

alxjrvs wrote: post #597
TimTheTinker wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DOGE headed by Elon Musk was one of Trump's foremost campaign promises. In terms of democracy, that is about as direct of an electoral mandate as possible. > not a lot of Pro-democracy leanings to spare right now How about having been duly elected in the ballot boxes? Being pro-democracy means accepting and implementing the will of the people. (Trump disputed the election results in 2020 because he believed there was…

> I don't think it's necessarily evidence of being anti-democracy in his leanings. This is either willful ignorance or something else.

It's a complete distrust in the media and all they say.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#622

Post by nailer »

sanderjd wrote: post #617
nailer wrote: post #604

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they used the term ‘authoritarian regime’ which commonly means this. See the references I have posted elsewhere in this thread.

It doesn't though. You are the only one who has brought up these other countries.

I am not Encyclopaedia Brittanica.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#623

Post by nailer »

sanderjd wrote: post #616
nailer wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You're right that most people in this thread are likely native english speakers, but that just means that we can understand that the weird narrow read of the words "authoritarian regime" is silly and, based on other comments you've made, very likely just you being purposely obtuse for partisan reasons.

I’m not sure why you feel the need to respond to me on multiple threads. As mentioned elsewhere, I am not the source of the common meaning of the term, I do not edit the encyclopaedia, the newspapers, take the photos or anything else you will see on the front page of Google when you search for “authoritarian regime”.

You know what an authoritarian regime commonly means, and you know what you were trying to do, and you just don’t like being called on it. Someone is indeed using HN for partisan advocacy and we both know it’s you.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#624

Post by exodust »

sophacles wrote: post #551
TimTheTinker wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much fraud and abuse has to occur before it's able to be labeled as "corruption"? Fraud literally means intentional lying in accounting or other financial representations, for the purpose of improperly benefiting someone. If people in government are benefited directly or indirectly by fraud, that's literally included in the definition of corruption.

Others have asked, and I'm going to ask: Prove the fraud. That is a specific charge, with a specific meaning - as you point out yourself in your comment. Pointing to money that was spent differently than you think it should be is not fraud, no matter how much you want to claim it. Pointing to money being spent in suboptimal ways is not fraud. Maybe it's waste - but often it's what the law calls for (aka definitionall…

> Show that the money was spent in a way different than proscribed by law

When people find loopholes in the law to obtain grants, do you defend their actions because technically it didn't break the law?

DOGE is apparently exposing a system of dubious and questionable spending at scale. If "wasteful" is an understatement, don't be surprised when taxpayers use "fraud" to describe the decisions made to blow their money.

Even if a court finds that funding that "drag show in Ecuador" was lawful, doesn't take the sting out. It doesn't take the fact away that someone benefited who probably shouldn't have, relative to the government's broader budget purposes. It might enrage people even more that it was a systemic abuse of grant money.

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#625

Post by alxjrvs »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #621
alxjrvs wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think it's necessarily evidence of being anti-democracy in his leanings. This is either willful ignorance or something else.

It's a complete distrust in the media and all they say.

What about your own lying eyes?

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#626

Post by winrid »

sanderjd wrote: post #285
johndhi wrote: post #275

One thing I'm confused by is that we need to do "reporting" to figure out what the truth is here. Can't we just ask the astronauts, or NASA, or something? Why is there no official statement on the matter? There's actually a video of Butch, from the station, saying Musk's description was "entirely factual" - although he then sort of backtracked that. Seems like no one wants to outright explain what happened.

Yeah, "no one wants to outright explain what happened" is called "chilling effects" and is one of the explicit goals of an authoritarian regime like the one we have in the US now. Nobody wants to get fired and get death threats just for speaking plainly, so most people don't. Every once in awhile someone will decide it's worth the cost, but most people most of the time will decide it isn't.

Biden signed 162 executive orders.

Is Trump somehow different here?

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#627

Post by _cs2017_ »

enragedcacti wrote: post #602
_cs2017_ wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fault in the Starliner was known in June 2024 ( https://www.space.com/nasa-boeing-starliner-crew-flight-test... ). By August 2024, NASA said that the crew would stay until Feb 2025. That was not the original plan like you claim. See also: https://www.reuters.com/technology/space/nasa-astronauts-hea... .

It's mind-numbingly obvious from context that the plan I was referring to was the rescue plan announced in August, not the starliner mission as a whole.

I see. So the timeline was:

1 Ship broken and delay announced until 2025

2 Musk offers his ship for return before 2025

3 Offer not accepted,

4 Pro-Musk claims the refusal was for political reasons, anti-Musk crowd claims it's not for political reasons but simply to comply with the original plan

Is that correct? If so, both groups agree with your comment, right?

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#628

Post by fc417fc802 »

nailer wrote: post #623
sanderjd wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that most people in this thread are likely native english speakers, but that just means that we can understand that the weird narrow read of the words "authoritarian regime" is silly and, based on other comments you've made, very likely just you being purposely obtuse for partisan reasons.

I’m not sure why you feel the need to respond to me on multiple threads. As mentioned elsewhere, I am not the source of the common meaning of the term, I do not edit the encyclopaedia, the newspapers, take the photos or anything else you will see on the front page of Google when you search for “authoritarian regime”. You know what an authoritarian regime commonly means, and you know what you were trying to do, and yo…

> I am not the source of the common meaning of the term,

The accuracy of your claim regarding common meaning is being disputed. You might notice that well over half of the quote you pasted from Britannica is referring to totalitarian, not authoritarian, regimes.

Nowhere does it say anything like "the term authoritarian regime is commonly taken to imply".

Re: Crew-9 Returns to Earth

#630

Post by justsid »

winrid wrote: post #626
sanderjd wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, "no one wants to outright explain what happened" is called "chilling effects" and is one of the explicit goals of an authoritarian regime like the one we have in the US now. Nobody wants to get fired and get death threats just for speaking plainly, so most people don't. Every once in awhile someone will decide it's worth the cost, but most people most of the time will decide it isn't.

Biden signed 162 executive orders. Is Trump somehow different here?

Without any value judgement on the actual orders, Trump signed 89 since taking office this year. Biden signed 77 in his first year in office. There certainly seems to be a difference unless this is comin to a stop relatively quickly.
Post reply on HN