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

Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

spacenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 799 posts

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#681

Post by kortilla »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #391
kortilla wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For starters, Trump can simply revoke Elon's security clearance. There's no recourse for this. And that makes SpaceX's military contracts real awkward. This isn't an issue. Execs nor shareholders are required to have clearance and even the ones that have clearance aren't read in to top secret stuff without a need to know. Elon's focus was starship which is quite far removed from any of those contracts (falcon gov la…

> Execs nor shareholders are required to have clearance and even the ones that have clearance aren't read in to top secret stuff without a need to know No clearance would absolutely compromise Musk’s ability to control SpaceX. (I think that’s a good thing.)

It wouldn’t matter for spacex, which is the point. It wouldn’t make “military contracts awkward”, whatever that means.

Musk would still maintain the ability to control what SpaceX targets as far as customers go. And he could easily decline any plans to pursue contracts that require changes in strategy.

Him having clearance is irrelevant to both the govt and to the future of spacex. Gwynne runs those parts of the company. Musk is only playing with Starship when he’s looking at spacex at all.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#682

Post by tootie »

yalogin wrote: post #584

We have moved so past the "government is expected to be impartial" and now at "if musk backs a dem I will destroy him" stage. No one bats an eye. This is going to be the norm at least on the Republican Party. I worry every one expects presidents to weaponize everything against their perceived opponents.

A lot of eyes are being batted. But really, him punishing Musk is barely in the top 100 things we're worried about right now. We're barely a few months into his term. The chances of seeing full on Martial Law before 4 years is terrifyingly high.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#683

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

avaika wrote: post #587
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It turns out that when elections are fought on the basis of identity (race, religion) etc corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing. So how could one design a political system so this behavior doesn't emerge / is not incentivized?

In no way this is a good example of such a system, but I still find Bosnia and Herzegovina political system absolutely hilarious. After Dayton peace agreement the literally put ethnicity requirement for presidents to Constitution as a hard rule. One Bosnian, one Serb and one Croatian. And yes, the country is ran by 3 presidents at the same time. So there is no longer a competition whether the main guy in the country…

Interesting.

When I put my programmer hat on, there's something inelegant about this approach, because it involves hardcoding the words "Bosnian", "Serb", and "Croatian" into the constitution.

It seems like with a sufficiently clever electoral rule, you could generate a small "national steering committee" with an odd number of members, where each major faction is guaranteed representation. But that also sounds a lot like a parliament where there's one party for each ethnic group, and then we're back where we started?

What happens when the 3 presidents disagree? Maybe the trick is to incentivize consensus-driven decisionmaking?

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#684

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

roryirvine wrote: post #610
avaika wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In no way this is a good example of such a system, but I still find Bosnia and Herzegovina political system absolutely hilarious. After Dayton peace agreement the literally put ethnicity requirement for presidents to Constitution as a hard rule. One Bosnian, one Serb and one Croatian. And yes, the country is ran by 3 presidents at the same time. So there is no longer a competition whether the main guy in the country…

Northern Ireland has a similar system, with an executive built on a forced coalition. The executive is led by a First Minister and Deputy First Minister (despite the difference in title, they have exactly equal powers), who are selected from the largest party representing each of the two main communities. Major decisions require cross-community support - at least 50% of all those voting AND 50% of the representatives…

I like this term "forced coalition". How about a traditional parliamentary system where a supermajority is required to pass legislation?

I assume if you need 70% to pass legislation then you get a grand coalition pretty much every time?

I guess it could incentivize brinkmanship among coalition partners though, since the leader of the coalition has less leverage if a small party threatens to quit?

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#685

Post by FrenchyJiby »

iamleppert wrote: post #619
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you unfamiliar with the many world-changing technologies and inventions that have come about because of the needs and drivers of the human space program? On what basis do you form the belief that we would not continue to develop and benefit from new world-changing innovations despite all historical evidence that says otherwise? A huge amount of scientific invention is made incidentally to another goal. It's inten…

I was waiting for this comment! What innovations have come about in the last 20 years of the human space program? Everyone always makes this claim but never can name a single one, or brings up unrelated things like the heat tiles on the space shuttle. What kinds of developments could not have been done with autonomous payloads?

Not an expert, but it seems NASA holds a few magazine publications for just that, it must come up often.

One VERY on topic is "ISS Benefits for Humanity", which shows why the ISS benefits everyone.

See edition 2022: https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/iss_benefits...

Seems from the table of contents, it breaks down to: earth observation, microbiology in microgravity, human health research, inspiring younglings, new physics, and "growing the low-earth economy".

Then broader there's a yearly one called Spinoff that points to the technology transfers, but that's not just from human flight, but from all NASA-funded work.

See last few years' edition: https://spinoff.nasa.gov/spinoff/archives

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#686

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

FireBeyond wrote: post #631
trueismywork wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to educate the people and convince them on how it works. Easily a 30 year project in places like India.

Easily a 30 year project in the US, too.

Yep. Sadly, Ranked Choice is not doing too well at the ballot in the US.

https://ballotpedia.org/Results_for_ranked-choice_voting_(RC...

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#687

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

Atreiden wrote: post #579
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It turns out that when elections are fought on the basis of identity (race, religion) etc corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing. So how could one design a political system so this behavior doesn't emerge / is not incentivized?

Get rid of FPTP and the Electoral College that enables a two-party stranglehold. If a vote for a third party wasn't a wasted vote, we could see nuanced parties and politicians emerge that don't have to tow a party line.

Strengthening third parties can also increase extremism though. Consider parties such as Reform in the UK or AfD in Germany.

I think what you want is electoral rules which tend to select for consensus-makers. Approval voting would be an example.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#688

Post by ETH_start »

sethammons wrote: post #606
ETH_start wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nothing. Compare that to deleting 30,000 emails to avoid them being scrutinized in an investigation.

You think Hegseth's use of Signal is nothing. Gotcha. Rules for thee but not for me.

I think using an open source encrypted communication app is no big deal compared to what Hillary Clinton did.

The Democratic Party thinks that what Hillary Clinton did was no big deal. Rules for thee, but not for me.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#689

Post by ETH_start »

rat87 wrote: post #544
ETH_start wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Democratic White House chose to not invite Tesla to their EV Summit. That was not political? The Democratic DoJ and Democrat DAGs prosecuted dozens of former Trump administration officials and Trump allies, and even Trump himself: Trump Administration Officials: Michael Flynn – Former National Security Advisor Stephen K. Bannon – Former White House Chief Strategist & Campaign Advisor Mark Meadows – Former White H…

Yes it was them following the law and being unbiased. Many of the people involved in prosecuting them are Republicans. Trump is the most corrupt president we've ever had and many of his allies are similarly corrupt. These days they know they just have to follow the maga line to get out of jail free. The Attorney General of Texas was so ridiculously corrupt he was about to be impeached by Texas Republicans but then he…

Copy-pasting my response to a similar partisan talking point:

--

There are hundreds of thousands of regulations carrying criminal penalties. If a political party is determined to imprison an opponent, it will find a law they’ve technically violated. In Trump’s case, they used an obscure accounting rule — one so trivial that even prominent Democratic supporters acknowledged it was an inappropriate basis for prosecution.

Hillary Clinton used a private email server while serving as Secretary of State, and in 2014, her staff deleted 31,000 emails they labeled personal to prevent them from being scrutinized in an impending investigation. You don't think that if Hillary had been a Republican and if the Democrats were determined to prosecute her, they couldn't have found some law that she broke and prosecuted her on it?

--

What you're claiming is absolutely absurd. This idea that Trump leads a criminal enterprise and everyone affiliated with him is corrupt and that's why so many were prosecuted and not that this is the same politicization of the justice system you see all over the world and Democrats, with the tacit support of establishment Republicans, trying to imprison their opponents.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#690

Post by bdangubic »

ETH_start wrote: post #688
sethammons wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think Hegseth's use of Signal is nothing. Gotcha. Rules for thee but not for me.

I think using an open source encrypted communication app is no big deal compared to what Hillary Clinton did. The Democratic Party thinks that what Hillary Clinton did was no big deal. Rules for thee, but not for me.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN