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

Starship’s second flight test

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 235 posts

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#111

Post by modeless »

maxlin wrote: post #104
enneff wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would have to happen to earth to make it less viable a place to live than mars? An asteroid rendering earth’s surface uninhabitable? Even that wouldn’t be enough - there’s still so much more on earth to sustain human life than any planet in our solar system. Apart from proof of concept I just don’t see any practical reason to colonise mars.

I don't get your point. Having a self-sustaining colony on Mars ready when suddenly the brother of the Chicxulub impactor appears on the radar and will hit in less time than it would require to create massive underground cave systems utilizing geothermal power would take to build, will literally save the species. And that is just one apocalypse variant. Nuclear holocaust. Antimatter bombs. Possibly even a massive gam…

I think Earth after nuclear holocaust or reasonably likely asteroid impact is still significantly more hospitable to human life than Mars. And any gamma ray burst affecting Earth would hit Mars too. Building survival silos on Earth would be cheaper and likely more effective to save the species in these situations.

Elon often talks about how exploration is exciting and inspirational and a prerequisite for future interstellar travel, and that works better as a justification to go to Mars, IMO. Also, while those disasters might not completely wipe out humans on Earth, they could reverse centuries or millennia of progress and delay further space exploration for hundreds or thousands of years if we don't do it now while we have the chance.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#112

Post by maxlin »

IshKebab wrote: post #100
maxlin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Checking the transcript, it is not unreasonable to say that "Next year we'll have 1mil robotaxis on the road, the fleet wakes up by OTA update" means "Robotaxi-capable in hardware" which is the main sell, IE that you buy car now, when the software is ready, and Tesla is closer than anyone else in having anything like that ready, your car will take the role of Robotaxi. Maybe a bit ambigious wording like when what Sea…

I don't know why you can't just accept that he makes crazy promises that are sometimes total nonsense. Sometimes his crazy promises do mostly pan out. But he's clearly massively over-promised in driverless cars. I'm really surprised there hasn't been a class action lawsuit from all the Tesla owners who were essentially tricked into paying $5k for a thing that can never exist.

Yes he has over-promised, but Tesla also has the most promising tech on this for many reasons. It seems more like the problem itself is turning out to just be harder to cover properly than foreseen originally.

However, cars last long and Tesla's batteries last as long as any, I remember seeing some very promising numbers from very old Model S's remaining battery capabilities, and of course the batteries can be replaced. I don't see why the robotaxi idea wouldn't increase the potential value of almost any Tesla considering even the NN chip hardware can be semi-easily upgraded if really needed

> that can never exist.

That sounds like someone saying muskets are a fad. Do you really truly believe that? Never heard anyone be _that_ pessimistic about it, especially with the continual improvements.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#113

Post by pjio »

Xenoamorphous wrote: post #78
happytiger wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s bonkers. It’s absolutely bonkers. I feel like I’m witnessing the creation of the wheel. Non-space nerds don’t quite understand why it’s so exciting. But I can’t imagine how much this is going to change the world, and civilization. It’s kind of the equivalent of going from local freighters to the Seawise Giant in one iteration.

Any hints on how this is going to change civilisation, for non-space nerds?

Scientists being able to do more science stuff in place where things wobble so strangely.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#114

Post by orbital-decay »

maxlin wrote: post #89
bboygravity wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example of 1 thing Elon said that hasn't become a reality and cannot become a reality in the next 10 years? 1 engineering or physics related thing. Deadlines don't count. I'm waiting...

This is a very engaging question. No idea why anyone would flag this.

Because this part

>cannot become a reality in the next 10 years

serves as red herring and allows to move the goalposts arbitrarily, making the question pretty manipulative. Anything can become a reality in 10 years, theoretically speaking. At the same time this is not the main issue with Elon claims at all.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#115

Post by aspaviento »

enneff wrote: post #98
maxlin wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

-Not being dependent on Earth for survival of the species as Starship in its huge capability and reasonably cheap cost, among with refuelability on Mars begins the road to believable planetary colonization -Asteroid / Moon mining -Overally, being capable of going to space with more than just miniscule science-oriented payloads. FYI, ISS has cost us over a 100 billion dollars. When Starship hauls its worth in volume i…

What would have to happen to earth to make it less viable a place to live than mars? An asteroid rendering earth’s surface uninhabitable? Even that wouldn’t be enough - there’s still so much more on earth to sustain human life than any planet in our solar system. Apart from proof of concept I just don’t see any practical reason to colonise mars.

A colony in Mars opens the door to improving space travelling which at the same time opens the door to explore other planets. In a distant future humanity may be able to visit other solar systems and who knows, maybe find other species out there.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#116

Post by maxlin »

modeless wrote: post #111
maxlin wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get your point. Having a self-sustaining colony on Mars ready when suddenly the brother of the Chicxulub impactor appears on the radar and will hit in less time than it would require to create massive underground cave systems utilizing geothermal power would take to build, will literally save the species. And that is just one apocalypse variant. Nuclear holocaust. Antimatter bombs. Possibly even a massive gam…

I think Earth after nuclear holocaust or reasonably likely asteroid impact is still significantly more hospitable to human life than Mars. And any gamma ray burst affecting Earth would hit Mars too. Building survival silos on Earth would be cheaper and likely more effective to save the species in these situations. Elon often talks about how exploration is exciting and inspirational and a prerequisite for future inter…

You might be right about the gamma ray burst.

From what I understand, for a nuke war, it is still _possible_ it will take out everyone considering the nuclear winter it will cause. In my thinking a redundant colony is worth even saving us having to play existential Russian Roulette with one loaded.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#117

Post by maxlin »

orbital-decay wrote: post #114
maxlin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very engaging question. No idea why anyone would flag this.

Because this part >cannot become a reality in the next 10 years serves as red herring and allows to move the goalposts arbitrarily, making the question pretty manipulative. Anything can become a reality in 10 years, theoretically speaking. At the same time this is not the main issue with Elon claims at all.

I get what you're coming from. But. I think it is fair considering some of the most beloved provider / consumer relationships we have often end up in the situation that everyone wants the thing as fast as possible, and the producer is very optimistic, wants to deliver and ends up "lying" about timelines without any ill intention.

Everyone still wants the damn thing. Critique is better aimed towards things that are actually impossible instead just being observed with too much optimism timewise. I don't think sharp unnecessary critique of irreplaceable multidisciplinary pioneers like Elon are healthy in any space, especially here. This is not Steam Forums.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#118

Post by Retric »

aspaviento wrote: post #115
enneff wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would have to happen to earth to make it less viable a place to live than mars? An asteroid rendering earth’s surface uninhabitable? Even that wouldn’t be enough - there’s still so much more on earth to sustain human life than any planet in our solar system. Apart from proof of concept I just don’t see any practical reason to colonise mars.

A colony in Mars opens the door to improving space travelling which at the same time opens the door to explore other planets. In a distant future humanity may be able to visit other solar systems and who knows, maybe find other species out there.

Colonizing mars doesn’t particularly help colonize space just mars because space is mostly empty not cold inhospitable planets.

A useful asteroid mining base might eventually let you expand into the Oort cloud and then colonize the rest of the galaxy assuming they could be 100% self sufficient and didn’t need solar power. But even here the hard bits are 99% technology we could develop on earth for other things like fusion power.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#119

Post by maxlin »

mulmen wrote: post #85
maxlin wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you research this a bit more it becomes clear that the survey has been the blocker, after the direct FAA checklist was cleared. Just google around, this has been bouncing around as an annoyance for a while in the space enthusiast circles so it's assumed knowledge in the context

You provided a source and made an untrue claim about the content. The shark question may have been a blocker but you haven’t provided any evidence to support that.

You're incorrect. I did not place any untrue claim about the content!

-What is known is the survey thingy has been a blocker for Starship

-The shark, and separately, whale, issues are things that are also relevant for Starship. But there is no info about implicit or explicit direct connection of these details to blocking status. A connection is just implied by you, not me.

Re: Starship’s second flight test

#120

Post by jeffhuys »

Gud wrote: post #99
radu_floricica wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, what's the point of getting where he is and shutting up just to make random people happy?

To efficiently reach his target goals? It would be such shame if Starship never flew because he squandered $45B on Twitter and made a lot of political enemies being an edge lord online..

That’s his money, not SpaceX money. Do you think he pays for everything out-of-pocket?
Post reply on HN