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

Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 560 posts

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#271

Post by petterroea »

devlovstad wrote: post #258

I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...

In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals"

Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#272

Post by bell-cot »

swingboy wrote: post #226

Apologies for the naivety, but, why is SpaceX valued so high? Starlink? Are rockets really a lucrative business? Don’t get me wrong, being able to send objects up into orbit is cool, but is it $1.8T cool?

Big picture: Nice-sounding economic theories claim that stock market valuations are rational, but those theories are mostly bullshit. As soon as the actual humans in the real-world stock market get excited, or scared, or otherwise emotional, they mostly stop caring about all that stupid boring gotta-do-math "rational" stuff.

Yes, eventually, the humans have to sober up, and stock market valuations return to approximately what the economic theories say they should be. But the dangers of betting on that "eventually" are very well known: https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/08/09/remain-solvent/

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#273

Post by Geezus_42 »

turzmo wrote: post #230
throwfaraway135 wrote: post #166

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

[flagged]

They've been simmping for Musk for at least a decade. Doing it for AI is only few years old.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#274

Post by detourdog »

johneth wrote: post #265
andyjohnson0 wrote: post #259

For those commenting that this decision may have a political element: Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Musk is a prominent Trump/MAGA supporter, and Trump has threatened to annex Greenland by force. SpaceX is part of Trump's Golden Dome project, and one of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems.

All good points, but I think their main point of poor governance is still the pure motivation.

The governance issues seem much worse than the other issues with pricing and inclusion.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#275

Post by petesergeant »

petterroea wrote: post #271
devlovstad wrote: post #258

I have AkademikerPension as my pension fund through work and this move suits me quite well. They've already excluded Tesla as well as a variety of companies that profit of weapon production, fossil fuel production or are suspected for human rights violations. https://akademikerpension.dk/ansvarlighed/ekskluderede-selsk...

In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.

That’s exactly what you would want your money manager to say. It’s their job to turn a profit.

In turn you also want democratically elected politicians above that saying “yes, but the people want their money made ethically, so you can’t do that”.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#276

Post by amelius »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #259

For those commenting that this decision may have a political element: Greenland is a part of the Kingdom of Denmark. Musk is a prominent Trump/MAGA supporter, and Trump has threatened to annex Greenland by force. SpaceX is part of Trump's Golden Dome project, and one of the reasons that Trump wants Greenland is to site ICBM detection and interceptor systems.

Then why not hedge? If they take Greenland at least they have their pensions.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#277

Post by kergonath »

Drakim wrote: post #263
eigenspace wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also sounds amazing until you remember how hard it is to cool something when your only option is radiative cooling.

You could also transfer the heat to tungsten rods and drop them on rivaling earth-bound data centers.

Why tungsten? In terms of thermal conductivity, It’s way worse than silver and copper and on par with good aluminium alloys. Those are cheaper and much lighter (so again much cheaper to put into orbit).

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#278

Post by johneth »

zamadatix wrote: post #176
throwfaraway135 wrote: post #166

The criticism seems politically motivated. Considering what happened to Blue Origin, SpaceX's success is commendable. Although I agree $1.8T seems crazy.

Most of the 1.8T hype is not at all related to the rocketry business. Well, I suppose if you buy the "AI DCs in space" pitch they could be somewhat related.

If you buy the "AI DCs in space" pitch, you deserve to be parted from your money.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#279

Post by 3683826312819 »

originalvichy wrote: post #181
spacebanana7 wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not Anthropic? They’re a very rare company capable of charging $200 per month per seat level fee across the corporate workforce. Yes their compute costs are astronomical, but that can be managed down over time by more efficiency or mild enshittification that doesn’t create too much churn.

You would think you’re investing in a software technology company, but after reading a bit of news stories, you realize you’re quite literally funding war crimes. If I invested in an arms company, I’d have reasonable expectations about what I invest in. Investing in Anthropic at surface level looks like investing in software for hobbies and business. It’s pretty depressing to be honest. I don’t know how I could work…

[dead]

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#280

Post by petterroea »

petesergeant wrote: post #275
petterroea wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Norway the oil fund are actively arguing against boycotting these kinds of companies saying, and I paraphrase: "but our job is to earn money and we can't do that if you hippies keep standing in the way with your morals" Good to see it isn't necessarily the case.

That’s exactly what you would want your money manager to say. It’s their job to turn a profit. In turn you also want democratically elected politicians above that saying “yes, but the people want their money made ethically, so you can’t do that”.

Of course, some back-and-forwards is healthy.

In a good system both sides fight for their interests, and the outcome is some middle road compromise that optimizes for everyone's benefit.

Post reply on HN