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

Starship V3

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 667 posts

Re: Starship V3

#261

Post by laughing_man »

senectus1 wrote: post #101
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

long term is doing a lot of heavy lifting here... in the very broad shoulders of long term, he's probably right.. its why the concept of a dysonsphere is around. you can get uninterrupted 24/7 free energy. but yeah, the tech is a long way away. *Edit: lol My estimate is that within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space. i think 2-3 years is a very unlikely outcome.

His timelines always assume absolutely everything goes right, and there are no legal or regulatory problems.

Re: Starship V3

#262

Post by Taniwha »

beambot wrote: post #32

Those Raptor 3 engines are a thing of beautiful simplicity compared to their forebears...

I'm not sure they're all that simpler, the basic plumbing probably hasn't changed much, it's just that modern fabrication tech means you can hide all the complexity inside

Re: Starship V3

#263

Post by sigmoid10 »

philipallstar wrote: post #247
pibaker wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the long term In case anyone is wondering how Tesla’s stock price remain wildly detached from its business reality, keep these four words in mind. If you can convince people that anything about you and your business has to be evaluated on a literally astronomical timescale, you can justify any valuation you desire, because your believers will give you infinite time to realize their investment returns. It has not…

All share price fundamentals are based on the long term. Short term trading is why some shares are very briefly high or low.

Well, at least that is what they teach you in college when you learn about the efficient market hypothesis. In reality, investors are getting less rational every year. The modern stock market has become pretty much decoupled from reality.

Re: Starship V3

#264

Post by laughing_man »

verzali wrote: post #210
avmich wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> despite his lack of engineering or technical skills At least he has B.Sc. in physics and got admitted into Stanford. I think what Elon says is better explained not as a promise what would happen, but rather as a goal which they're going to aspire to. It kinda supports the idea "we're in business of converting impossible into late". If Elon will start offering more "realistic" schedules, the pace of SpaceX will slow…

I have a physics degree. It is not at all the same thing as an engineering degree.

Presumably (hopefully) you don't stop learning when you leave school, though. A physics degree has always been viewed as a good basis for advanced engineering.

Re: Starship V3

#265

Post by benj111 »

pveierland wrote: post #116
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

You can put computers underground. Cheaper than launching into space.

Why put them in space? Power? We have that on earth.

Re: Starship V3

#266

Post by laughing_man »

inglor_cz wrote: post #246
eagerpace wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And to think, it wasn’t that long ago competitors we still using old Russian engines for their domestic rockets. Brilliant work to get back to leadership in this domain.

The engines for New Glenn ain't bad either. Competition does improve products.

New Glenn's engines are quite a bit less efficient than those at SpaceX. Lower chamber pressures, lower thrust:weight ratio, and they're partial flow staged combustion.

I assume BO will increase their performance over time, but for now they company is about a decade behind SpaceX.

Re: Starship V3

#267

Post by kamaal »

onehair wrote: post #197
illiac786 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are saying he got lucky? That doesn’t necessarily mean he will continue to be lucky.

They mean, to attempt things that seem very difficult to normies like you and me, and be successful at it, one needs to be insane.

I think Elon Musk is quite literally the living example of what high agency lifesytle would look like.

One could argue he likely knew way less than your day job rocket scientist or battery experts when he started out. But these people believe so as long something is not impossible by known physics it is doable, and hence there is a way to get it done. And then they do it.

That is you wake up everyday, and do whatever it take to get things done. You keep moving forward, you keep taking the next steps.

Of course you need lots of other aspects of human enterprise like tenacity, productivity etc for all this. But once you get the root value right, all things descend from there on.

Re: Starship V3

#268

Post by benj111 »

mavhc wrote: post #254
throw310822 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every single satellite has sufficient cooling for its power production But here we're talking about putting data centers in space. It means stuffing as many gpus as possible into each satellite and running them at constant max power.

https://terafab.ai/ has a diagram of the proposed satellites

"1 billion Tesla Optimus robots"

Christ. I thought we had seen the last of the Musk-tards.

Re: Starship V3

#269

Post by crvdgc »

pveierland wrote: post #116
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

In the long term, the biggest problem is that space data centers are very hard to defend against missiles.

Re: Starship V3

#270

Post by arijun »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #252

Quick update for the folks passionate about space things (since this thread is full of unrelated comments): V3 is their first Starship family big upgrade, containing lots of learnings from previous tests, and the big engine upgrades. V3 engines are the first iteration of a production engine, with lots of sensors and auxiliary systems integrated into the engine itself. Besides the improvements in thrust, they've strea…

> moved a lot of stuff "inside" the engine

The level that they managed to fit everything inside of a simple-looking package was so high that the CEO of ULA (the Boeing/Lockheed Martin rocket company) thought they were lying when they first showed pictures [1].

[1] https://www.benzinga.com/news/24/08/40279896/spacex-presiden...

Post reply on HN