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

Starbase, LA

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 641 posts

Re: Starbase, LA

#531

Post by sillyfluke »

thegrim33 wrote: post #188
utopiah wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm is it though? Quite a few articles like https://futurism.com/future-society/elon-musk-stiffing-contr... make me think they better ask to be paid upfront.

It's so interesting to me that the whole "futurism" concept got co-opted into some sort of political propaganda machine. All the articles are negative hit pieces, they're all reductive, they're almost all political in nature. I used to go on the futurism subreddit years ago and it's all the same there. You'd think "futurism" would be about .. promoting new technology, ushering in the future, you know .. futurism. Not…

>It's so interesting to me that the whole "futurism" concept got co-opted into some sort of political propaganda machine.

This was a very predictable outcome given the curcumstances.

You forget to mention the guy who was the posterboy for futurism literally decided to turn himself into a political machine circa 2018 or thereabouts against half of the country, apparently triggered by his inablity to cope with his child transitioning and the bruising of his ego when NPCs on the internet made fun of him for failing where they succeded (the scuba diver pedo incident is one example).

Prior to that, he was the second coming of Steve Jobs to the same cohort (pg even called him "Steve Jobs with no taste" on this forum at the time).

Tech should be considered with its political direction (or lack of) to be deserving of adulation. The Cold War dictated the Apollo program for Christ's sake. The whole thing was saturated in politics. The difference is that most people were united for the cause. Believe me, if the people running the Apollo program declared war on half the country it would have been remembered and popularized quite differently.

I'm sure Jewish German scientists had a reluctant admiration for whatever Wernher Von Brauhn was acheiving with the Nazi space program but it would be completely secondary to the fact that he was enabling the Nazi party to "win". No engineering feat could or should eclipse that fact.

Regarding Tech without taking into account the direction it's pointed at is ridiculously naive, whichever side of the political spectrum you are on.

It's not like Germany would have magically grown out of the Nazi party if only Von Braun kept on building cool shit.

Re: Starbase, LA

#532

Post by inglor_cz »

Noaidi wrote: post #286
aksss wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incremental domestic capital investment, good. The level of cynicism, shit-talking, and schadenfreude wish-casting in response to this is crazy. Start cheering on successes. Resist the deconstructionist mindset.

Elon Musk is mostly a bad person. I do not want mostly bad people to succeed. Why is that hard to understand? You either do no think he is a bad person, or ignore the fact he is.

One of the killer features of the modern democracy/market system combo is that it can channel quite a lot of bad people's efforts towards neutral or good outcomes.

A scenario where Musk builds an interplanetary space company is infinitely better than a scenario where Musk is a warlord conquering some unlucky province of a decrepit empire with sword and fire.

Giving such people an option to succeed economically is probably the safest way how to deal with them. SpaceX > Attila, Amazon > vikings.

Re: Starbase, LA

#533

Post by detritus »

9dev wrote: post #498
zamadatix wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debate used to be the staunchest form of resistance. This last decade, racing to call the opposition a crybaby and declare it activism seems to be more in vogue.

No, sorry, that’s a strawman. You’re framing this as if we were talking about some nuanced policy issue, which it isn’t. The concrete situation is a president unilaterally renaming a geographical feature for no other defensible reason than hubris, in disagreement with the rest of the region. I agree with GP - there is no debate to be had over this, only rejection.

Indeed, if you don't push back and reject it, it just encourages him to repeat the same - see Lake Ontario > Lake America.

Re: Starbase, LA

#534

Post by zombot »

zamadatix wrote: post #479
phlakaton wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no debate. There never was. There is only concession to the diktat or resistance.

Debate used to be the staunchest form of resistance. This last decade, racing to call the opposition a crybaby and declare it activism seems to be more in vogue.

> racing to call the opposition a crybaby

Nobody is calling "the opposition" a crybaby, but a specific crybaby person.

Re: Starbase, LA

#535

Post by zombot »

detritus wrote: post #533
9dev wrote: post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, sorry, that’s a strawman. You’re framing this as if we were talking about some nuanced policy issue, which it isn’t. The concrete situation is a president unilaterally renaming a geographical feature for no other defensible reason than hubris, in disagreement with the rest of the region. I agree with GP - there is no debate to be had over this, only rejection.

Indeed, if you don't push back and reject it, it just encourages him to repeat the same - see Lake Ontario > Lake America.

Maybe he thinks it would make America great again. It's one of the great lakes, after all.

Re: Starbase, LA

#536

Post by estearum »

TMWNN wrote: post #460
estearum wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you find a source of someone saying this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W676Kk9LSYw

Did you watch the video? This person didn't say it was impossible to launch enough satellites for Starlink.

He said the Falcon 1 launch price of $5MM was unrealistic, which ended up being correct. At the time, Falcon 1 was supposed to launch 600kg for $5MM. It ended up launching 420kg for $9MM. $8k/kg to $21k/kg.

Now obviously there's always a lot of doubt and skepticism around SpaceX, but you can just say "people said this would be really hard but they did it." Or you can say "Musk set a goal to 4x performance and got to an also-remarkable 3x" or whatever.

Even in this video, the smug Ariane guy heaps a decent amount of praise upon SpaceX and what they've achieved. He just said a $5MM launch will not be one of those things, and he was correct.

Re: Starbase, LA

#537

Post by gchamonlive »

WalterBright wrote: post #312
gchamonlive wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very narrow view of inflation. If you increase wages, there's more demand for goods, more demand means higher prices which means higher inflation. Same with tariffs, they are paid when importing goods, which is passed onto the consumer, resulting in higher prices and thus inflation.

> That's a very narrow view of inflation. It's the only correct one. For proof, consider the inflation that happened when Spain looted gold from S. America, then during the California Gold Rush, then the Yukon Gold Rush. All driven by an increase in the supply of money.

So you are applying economic dynamics from the... gold rush to the modern era? You do realise gold isn't the base value for dollar since 1933 at least.

Re: Starbase, LA

#538

Post by thrance »

kulahan wrote: post #477
thrance wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice strawman.

Nope, just showing how ridiculous it is to hold the position that everything is political. It's okay to just talk about things casually, dude. Chill out, it'll serve you well. If your position isn't that everything is political, don't say it is. If it is your position, this is perfectly in line with what you stated.

Your strawman didn't show anything, except that you're unwilling to engage with other viewpoints in good faith and will immediately dismiss them as ridiculous instead of advancing actual arguments.

Why should we be silent over the obvious political aspects of giving Musk more government contracts? Just to please you?

Re: Starbase, LA

#539

Post by tim333 »

thegrim33 wrote: post #188
utopiah wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm is it though? Quite a few articles like https://futurism.com/future-society/elon-musk-stiffing-contr... make me think they better ask to be paid upfront.

It's so interesting to me that the whole "futurism" concept got co-opted into some sort of political propaganda machine. All the articles are negative hit pieces, they're all reductive, they're almost all political in nature. I used to go on the futurism subreddit years ago and it's all the same there. You'd think "futurism" would be about .. promoting new technology, ushering in the future, you know .. futurism. Not…

I had a look back at Futurism.com for nov 2017 when it started https://web.archive.org/web/20171123090521/https://futurism....

top stories nov 2017 - science updates, asteroid mining allowed, battery advances

top stories now (aug 2026) - Trump is crap, Musk is crap, Obesity drugs are crap

Maybe just everything gradually gets taken over by political moaning over time?

Re: Starbase, LA

#540

Post by [deleted] »

zombot wrote: post #535
detritus wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, if you don't push back and reject it, it just encourages him to repeat the same - see Lake Ontario > Lake America.

Maybe he thinks it would make America great again. It's one of the great lakes, after all.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN