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

No Billionares at FOSDEM

drewdevault.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 213 posts

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#201

Post by lamontcg »

inemesitaffia wrote: post #186
lamontcg wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All engineers and other professionals told him that landing rockets is bullshit You literally responded to a guy citing Lars Blackmore, who is the engineer that designed their landing algorithm--which was developed at NASA's JPL lab (before SpaceX existed). Musk bet on landing rockets _because_ engineers told him that it was possible.

The landing was completely developed at SpaceX without NASA tech, assistance or money. By Lars. After figuring out parachutes were infeasible. In fact it was one of the reasons red dragon was cancelled. The group studying hypersonic retro propulsion of boosters at NASA was let go because that's what SpaceX did to land

The Air Force was studying RTLS as part of the ARES (Affordable REsponsive Spacelift) program in 2005 (Which was the result of 1992/1994-era discussions on "spacecast 2020"):

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2005-6682

Lars and Beschet wrote their groundbreaking paper on lossless convexification of the powered descent problem at JPL before Lars went to SpaceX:

http://www.larsblackmore.com/CarsonAcikmeseBlackmoreACC11.pd...

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#202

Post by inemesitaffia »

lamontcg wrote: post #201
inemesitaffia wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The landing was completely developed at SpaceX without NASA tech, assistance or money. By Lars. After figuring out parachutes were infeasible. In fact it was one of the reasons red dragon was cancelled. The group studying hypersonic retro propulsion of boosters at NASA was let go because that's what SpaceX did to land

The Air Force was studying RTLS as part of the ARES (Affordable REsponsive Spacelift) program in 2005 (Which was the result of 1992/1994-era discussions on "spacecast 2020"): https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2005-6682 Lars and Beschet wrote their groundbreaking paper on lossless convexification of the powered descent problem at JPL before Lars went to SpaceX: http://www.larsblackmore.com/CarsonAcikmeseBlackmore…

Blue Origin landed first, where was that from?

And I don't see any rocket actually coming back with an orbital payload? Where's the demonstrator? Like that quiet supersonic thing Lockheed is demonstrating.

Even Lars didn't deliver at the first attempt. So it's not like it was something available off the shelf. Like some cryptography library you include in your code.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#203

Post by _shantaram »

throw5959 wrote: post #26
wormlord wrote: post #15

I don't know how someone could look at Dorsey/Musk/Bezos actions and still be interested in what they have to say. There's probably a lot to be learned from someone who worships money, assuming that your goal is to emulate them. However their lifestyle and ideology is inherently dangerous to workers and life on earth as we know it. So yeah I don't really care what they have to say beyond knowing how the enemy views t…

What other person started a rocket company from scratch and got them landing? Of course I want to hear everything he says. Yes, he's crazy - seems to be a requirement if you want to do such stuff. Doesn't mean I will ignore it. I can think for myself, it's not like I take everything at face value. All that to say, perhaps other people don't prioritize values like you do. The technical excellence that companies repeat…

McDonnell Douglas seems to have gotten it done, from a quick skim of [1]. It appears they ran out of funding and the program was cancelled. According to the same article,

> Elon Musk stated that the SpaceX Falcon 9 development was "... continuing the great work of the DC-X project."

So...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#204

Post by anonfordays »

phoronixrly wrote: post #133
lolinder wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm one of the flaggers. This is just my opinion, I'm not speaking for the others, but: I flagged because the piece is poorly argued and mostly just spiteful. It starts off on a bad foot by implying that Dorsey chose to sell Twitter to Musk and made billions on the sale, both of which are false. Dorsey was forced to sell Twitter to Musk by the shareholders and the board. The shareholders profited, but Dorsey actually…

> If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it Is this story spam or off-topic? What is the topic anyway? Is an article ever on topic if it's not one of Paul Graham's "essays"?

We shouldn't be platforming or providing safe spaces to pedophiles. I flag any and all Drew DeVault content because I don't want this to be a pedophile bar.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#206

Post by myst »

latexr wrote: post #167
myst wrote: post #41

Why not just take the money and skip the talk? He can speak to an empty hall as much as he pleases.

> Why not just take the money and skip the talk? I don’t understand what you’re suggesting here. FOSDEM is a free event, attendees don’t pay. I doubt speakers are paid much or at all, either, though I wouldn’t be surprised if the organisers covered their travel/hotel/meals.

FOSDEM takes his sponsor money, attendees do not show up to the talk.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#207

Post by whamlastxmas »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #82
whamlastxmas wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope those volunteers decline to volunteer their time to setup and run jacks presentation then

I hope that they do whatever they personally feel is an appropriate use of their time, and that know-it-alls in the crowd don’t try and ruin anything that the volunteers do end up deciding is worth working hard to set up.

Agreed minus snark

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#208

Post by phoronixrly »

anonfordays wrote: post #204
phoronixrly wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If a story is spam or off-topic, flag it Is this story spam or off-topic? What is the topic anyway? Is an article ever on topic if it's not one of Paul Graham's "essays"?

We shouldn't be platforming or providing safe spaces to pedophiles. I flag any and all Drew DeVault content because I don't want this to be a pedophile bar.

OK, but how does this invalidate the point that billionaires are off-topic for FOSDEM?

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#209

Post by anonfordays »

phoronixrly wrote: post #208
anonfordays wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We shouldn't be platforming or providing safe spaces to pedophiles. I flag any and all Drew DeVault content because I don't want this to be a pedophile bar.

OK, but how does this invalidate the point that billionaires are off-topic for FOSDEM?

Non sequitur, the point is irrelevant. Flag all content, comments, posts, etc. from pedophiles and move on.

Re: No Billionares at FOSDEM

#210

Post by goldsteinq »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #70
isodev wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see self landing rockets, electric cars , star link etc You mean brilliant people were able to achieve this despite him? I don't see why this CEO should be the one taking credit for such achievements. In fact, I believe we would probably be further into the “Space Age” if it weren't for the lost decade since he appeared on TV.

This is demented levels of cope. Musk is the most successful is basically everything he does across extremely different industries. SpaceX is a decade ahead of the next closest competitor. Tesla and self driving is wildly ahead of any other car manufacturer.

> basically everything he does

Like The Boring Company? Or Twitter? Or Hyperloop?

Post reply on HN