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

691–700 of 799 posts

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#691

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

unicornporn wrote: post #586
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?

How about not creating a precarious underclass with lack of (higher) education that is ready to vote for whatever solution promising to take down the system that made them so desperate for radical change?

If the functioning of your nation's political system depends on the functioning of your nation's education system or your nation's economy, you've created a circular dependency. The education system and the economy are themselves downstream of the political system. Dysfunction in one tends to create dysfunction in the others. See https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2004/Caplanidea.htm...

A good political system is one which continues to work well even when education and the economy suck, so societal self-repair is possible. Ideally it would actually start working better when things suck, so society becomes antifragile.

"More college diplomas" is not a great solution when existing graduates are already working at Starbucks. This is the "elite overproduction" which creates instability.

Americans already have a relatively high standard of living by global standards, e.g. see median income adjusted for cost of living: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-median-income?tab=t...

Yet Americans are still dissatisfied. Part of the problem is that our political system incentivizes candidates and media outlets to stir up dissatisfaction so they can exploit it. There's also envy / the hedonic treadmill.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#692

Post by FireBeyond »

fhdkweig wrote: post #317
the_af wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, I didn't know this. I didn't even know this was a possible defense at all, "everything I say is bullshit, so if anyone takes it seriously, that's on them".

My memory is a bit fuzzy, but that was also Trump's family's response to the financial statements related to his businesses when it came up in court. But I don't remember which court case it was.

That was the one where he told the IRS the buildings he owned were worth $(x)M for tax purposes, but was simultaneously having them valued at $(10x)M for loan collateral purposes.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#693

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #602
unicornporn wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about not creating a precarious underclass with lack of (higher) education that is ready to vote for whatever solution promising to take down the system that made them so desperate for radical change?

I don't really buy the education argument. How do you "educate" somebody who lived through the first Trump administration and voted for more of the same? Let's get specific: what exactly did they miss in school that would have driven them towards a different decision? At some point it's necessary to confront the uncomfortable truth: stupid people are easy for smart, ill-intentioned people to herd, which gives the lat…

>This bug in democracy was there in the beginning. But it's only now, 2500 years later, that it can be exploited effectively enough to invalidate the whole concept.

Not sure where the 2500 number came from. The US is about 250 years old, and the founders were extremely wary of democracy based on its history prior to the US. The US constitution was designed to mitigate issues with democracy, e.g. that is the purpose of "checks and balances". By democracy standards, the US has been very successful; the average constitution only lasts 17 years: https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/lifespan-written-constitut...

This article estimates that the US is the #2 longest-lasting republic after the Roman Republic: https://www.broadstreet.blog/p/the-democratic-institutions-o...

Nonetheless, you would think that the "technology" for writing constitutions would've evolved more in the past 250 years. And in fact, in the Federalist Papers, it is predicted that political technology will evolve, just like any other field of technology. Yet results there have been quite disappointing, if you ask me. There aren't that many interesting and innovative ideas in this area. Most people, even programmers, tend to get lost in the object level us-vs-them conflict instead of going meta with their creative algorithmic brain.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#694

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

Propelloni wrote: post #607
CamperBob2 wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really buy the education argument. How do you "educate" somebody who lived through the first Trump administration and voted for more of the same? Let's get specific: what exactly did they miss in school that would have driven them towards a different decision? At some point it's necessary to confront the uncomfortable truth: stupid people are easy for smart, ill-intentioned people to herd, which gives the lat…

They missed that liberty and freedom is not a god-given right, but hard-earned privilege. They missed that liberty is not a personal property but a shared practice of pluralism. They missed that liberty is not absolute, but requires compromise and limitations so that we all can be free. To be fair, those are not things that are taught in school. If they come up at all it is in some historical context, a battle someon…

>Modern, ie. post-WW2, "fighting democracies" have built-in safeguards to oppose internal enemies of democracy, but if they are effective remains to be seen.

Eh, "internal enemies of democracy" is way too vague. E.g. Trump supporters claim that "unelected bureaucrats" in the "deep state" are enemies of democracy. Anyone can call anyone an "enemy of democracy".

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#695

Post by ETH_start »

bdangubic wrote: post #690
ETH_start wrote: post #688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

Comments like this really don't belong in hacker news. They amount to blind partisanship and instigation of flame wars.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#696

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…

I also want to make it absolutely clear that it is all about framing. From your beltway-manufactured frame, Trump instigated January 6th, and this amounted to insurrection. But a much more reasonable framing is that leading Democrats instigated over 500 riots in the summer of 2020, and are instigating the current riots too:

https://x.com/camhigby/status/1931898945435021349

Kamala Harris even tweeted this out, to bail out rioters:

> “If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota.”

Of course the mainstream news media journalists who are all unionized and thus economically aligned with the Democratic Party barely cover this or criticize it.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#697

Post by thephyber »

consumer451 wrote: post #344
AlexandrB wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to love this pithy quote but reflecting on it more recently this doesn't seem like something limited to fascists or fascism. Indeed, this kind of thinking is used by those of any political leaning when ideology becomes more important than principles. An obvious example is the USSR.

This is a great example of the horseshoe theory of politics [0], which I believe in very strongly. I made a separate post if anyone cares to discuss it. [1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44214040

Horseshoe Theory is stupid.

It’s based on the flawed assumption that politics can or should be understood on a single axis. It can’t and shouldn’t be. That heuristic is wrong.

If viewed on a 2d axis, the “cohorts that appear similar” on the ends of the horseshoe are still on opposing ends of one of the axes, despite being near each other on another axis.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#698

Post by bdangubic »

ETH_start wrote: post #695
bdangubic wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Comments like this really don't belong in hacker news. They amount to blind partisanship and instigation of flame wars.

comparing Hegseth to HRC will do a whole lot more :)

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#699

Post by solumunus »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #687
Atreiden wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

FPTP is what makes Reform so dangerous though. They have a real chance of having a lot of power. In a proportional representation system where parties have to share power in coalitions these extreme parties actually have to be involved in government, at which point they’re exposed as completely incompetent. See the Netherlands right now for example. I would rather have these extreme positions represented, because they will be represented poorly. It takes wind out of the populist sails, where they can no longer simply promise everything until they’re in power and completely destroy the country.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#700

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

jmyeet wrote: post #38
BirAdam wrote: post #24

So, the government would do what, lean on Russia with whom the USA is currently engaged in a proxy war? Also, for Boeing or Blue Origin, the cost would currently be higher per launch, and as far as I know, no one has the kind of satellite network that SpaceX does. Of course, those are sane considerations. I suppose I shouldn’t accuse the Donald of any kind of rational thinking.

SpaceX is critical infrastructure to the US at this point and its continued availability and operation is of national security interest. That may sound like it gives Elon power. It's the opposite, actually. No US administration will take lightly threats to national security infrastructure like this. The nuclear option for any administration is to nationalize SpaceX, which they absolutely could do. Less nuclear: the U…

How do you force a company to provide services?

Nationalization can't work for a company working at the bleeding edge of tech. Everyone would leave, their stock options now worthless or paid out.

Name one single time in history nationization has worked? I can name 100 counter examples.

Post reply on HN