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

SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

vine.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 279 posts

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#181

Post by dredmorbius »

threeseed wrote: post #173
SEJeff wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His theatrics aside, he wants to make electric cars viable and take us to mars. Even if he ultimately fails, if he makes everyone else rise up to compete with him, we as humanity win.

Tesla didn't start the electric car resurgence nor is it likely to take us to Mars. The way I see it Elon is rising up to those around him not the other way around.

Elon is rising up to those around him

Sometimes -- and I'd argue often -- leadership consists more of both 1) getting out of the way of and 2) enabling those who Want To Get Shit Done.

I find the fanboiism somewhat tedious (I don't find the top comment of this thread all that insightful), but I do admire Musk for seeming to hit a number of remarkable goals. That said, I find Tesla and Solar City more impressive/promising than SpaceX (technical challenges and accomplishments notwithstanding) or the Hyperloop (ultimately an idea that's been rightfully junked in the past).

Given the history of US industry of doing just the opposite -- stalling and preventing needed innovation -- if I had to pick a single attribute of his that I find most encouraging it's his leadership in that regard.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#182

Post by dredmorbius »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #92
iamcreasy wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Elon Musk said talking about hyperloop was like shooting his own foot. It was a premature idea. But the interesting part is some(more than some) people are actually trying trying to come up with a real world implementations of hyperloop and so far their verdict is 'it's doable' and they are working on it. And these people are engineers from reputed companies around the world. I don't particularly like the conce…

"Premature idea" is probably better phrased as "not feasible on technical grounds." Even tlb said it has huge problems. The steel expands in summer due to heat. Where does it go? Roads can expand using those interlocking teeth things, but hyperloop has to remain a closed system. Oh well. Everyone should dream once in awhile. EDIT: So... is this incorrect?

There was a 1970s proposal for an underground tunneled very-high-speed transport quite similar to the hyperloop. Partially-evacuated tubes, relatively small vehicles. Cost and other considerations torpedoed it.

Look up R.M. Salter at RAND:

"The Very High Speed Transit System" (August, 1972)

"Trans-Planetary Subway Systems -- A Burgeoning Capability" (February, 1978)

http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P4874.html http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/papers/2008/P4874....

http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P6092.html http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/papers/2009/P6092....

Similar / more: http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/6107059

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#183

Post by lnanek2 »

simias wrote: post #78

I'm annoyed by this trend of having posts with 0 context or analysis on the top of the frontpage. Yesterday we had a link to some bitcoin chart showing a sudden drop in price (why? I still don't know). A few days ago it was a gif of a flowchart for some brainfuck interpreter (I had to dig into the comments to find the link to the source code). And now... Vine?! The problem with that kind of submissions (images, short…

On most sites like this a little context can be added by the title on the social news site, but Hacker News does not allow that. Moderators will change the title to whatever the page has.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#184

Post by murtza »

goshx wrote: post #26

Could someone please explain the "no cigar"?

I am working on a project to define phrases in English like "close, but no cigar".

Here's the page for this phrase: http://jargonism.com/words/437

I would be interested to hear feedback from HN on what would be useful on the word page, in addition to a definition and an example?

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#185

Post by dredmorbius »

guelo wrote: post #151
ChuckMcM wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm trying, but not succeeding, to imagine a non-fiction situation where a corporation has any business advantage in owning and/or controlling an ICBM. Can you expand on your comment? What would a corporation do with this, other than to perhaps implement same day delivery of packages around the globe?

The best historical example is the British East India Company whose private army conquered India and ruled it for about 100 years. Another example is the United Fruit Company in South America that bought local armies to crush rebellions. Since the US government has become so corrupt American companies have found it easy to use the power of the US government to coerce other countries, for example for intellectual prop…

Any good references on BEIC and its army?

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#186

Post by catshirt »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #92
iamcreasy wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Elon Musk said talking about hyperloop was like shooting his own foot. It was a premature idea. But the interesting part is some(more than some) people are actually trying trying to come up with a real world implementations of hyperloop and so far their verdict is 'it's doable' and they are working on it. And these people are engineers from reputed companies around the world. I don't particularly like the conce…

"Premature idea" is probably better phrased as "not feasible on technical grounds." Even tlb said it has huge problems. The steel expands in summer due to heat. Where does it go? Roads can expand using those interlocking teeth things, but hyperloop has to remain a closed system. Oh well. Everyone should dream once in awhile. EDIT: So... is this incorrect?

of course a profound technical concept will provoke questions regarding its technical feasibility.

so what is your point? that it's impossible? that it shouldn't be attempted? that it's not a problem worth working through?

"naysaying" doesn't mean "saying no". "naysaying" is the inability to see a little further into the future based on the knowledge we have today.

> "The steel expands in summer due to heat. Where does it go?"

a cliche example but- i'd love to be the anachronistic fly on the wall listening to all the "where will the hot metal go???" people talking to the Wright brothers.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#187

Post by goshx »

murtza wrote: post #184
goshx wrote: post #26

Could someone please explain the "no cigar"?

I am working on a project to define phrases in English like "close, but no cigar". Here's the page for this phrase: http://jargonism.com/words/437 I would be interested to hear feedback from HN on what would be useful on the word page, in addition to a definition and an example?

That's cool. If you could add this, I always like to know the origin of the phrase.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#188

Post by johntb86 »

gizmo686 wrote: post #17
ufmace wrote: post #4

Cool video! Just what we've been waiting to see. I wonder what actually exploded there? Part of the argument for why the landing was supposed to be relatively safe was that the stage would be mostly empty of fuel by the time that it landed, so there wouldn't be much to explode if something went wrong. So is that an explosion of the remaining fuel in the rocket, or something on deck?

You need some margin for error to assure that you have enough fuel during the last fuel seconds to hit the marge at a safe speed, this means that there will likely be some fuel left over. In terms of a rocket exploding, that explosion seemed tiny. Compare it to the Antares [1], which exploded just a few seconds after launch. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHMmMgdcOSU

Another example is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3BB8SsIEtA , though even in that case the launch ship wasn't too damaged.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#189

Post by Symmetry »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #110
Sammi wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and could speculate that the main engine fired 'wrongly' because the control code didn't take into account that the fins were locked.

Hm, if I was the guy designing the control loop on that thing (not gonna happen in real world, but bear with me), I would definitely take into account the fins position - the real position, not the one I want them to be in. Not that it would have helped anyway in this case.

I suspect that the code takes the fin's starting position into account in each planning cycle but also assumes that the fin will move as directed in the future.

Re: SpaceX: “Close, but no cigar. This time”

#190

Post by sliverstorm »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #22
guelo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You joke but a future were corporations control ICBMs to their advantage is a realistic worry.

I'm trying, but not succeeding, to imagine a non-fiction situation where a corporation has any business advantage in owning and/or controlling an ICBM. Can you expand on your comment? What would a corporation do with this, other than to perhaps implement same day delivery of packages around the globe?

It's basically the company-as-government idea, wherein a company is so big it begins to function like a government, including military operation to further its goals.

Which, tangentially, is the model presented by extreme libertarians as the way of the future and how we can do away with government for good.

Post reply on HN