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

551–560 of 560 posts

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#551

Post by sehansen »

hosteur wrote: post #462
adamtulinius wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, time to dump Velliv it seems.

Well, often you don't get to "dump" your pension fund. In Denmark, it is your employer deciding what pension fund to use, and you will then have to use it. It is kinda ridiculous.

AFAIK only pension contributions mentioned in a collective bargaining agreement is mandatory. If you get offered a regular contract offering a salary plus 10% pension you can accept the job, write an email to HR stating that you opt out and get the extra 10% as take home pay. You can the make voluntary pension contributions to whatever pension fund you have a private agreement with. And all the private pension companies are very happy to make such an agreement, though the terms will be worse than an employer plan from the same company. Or you could do a completely self-administered one, e.g. through Nordnet.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#552

Post by sehansen »

omgwtfbyobbq wrote: post #525
nolok wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not parent, but Tesla is currently worth more in the stock market than the ten biggest car seller combined That's with falling sales, with no new product in sight and their latest release a big dud (despite SpaceX ordering massive amount of it to prop it up), and with a pricing and thus margin that is going to be massively lowered or beaten by Chinese ev. Protectionism by the US can only go so far, the US alone doesn…

Tesla's EV is worth about the same as the the EV of the term biggest car companies combined. It is highly speculative, but their current new product is the Semi, which started volume production last month, and they have the robotaxi and Optimus in the pipeline. One advantage they have over other manufacturers is their willingness to move into (and out of) adjacent verticals to optimize product cost/design/etc. They c…

European truck manufacturers like MAN and Scania have already had electric semi-trucks on the market for years. And they are selling, the Danish transport giant DSV alone has 400 driving around Europe.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#553

Post by benregenspan »

brikym wrote: post #252
wjnc wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A long and a short cancel out. So you could construe this yourselves. (Recognise that this has a long tradition on HN ;)

Besides laziness being a tradition among programmers (in a good way), that kind of complex activity is going to generate tax in a lot of jurisdictions.

Well FWIW, all of my attempts to short have generated losses.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#554

Post by sehansen »

leopoldj wrote: post #157
malcolmgreaves wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A mayor who balanced the city’s budget.

the balance heavily relies on a mix of state bailouts and new tax revenues

Increasing taxes is a textbook method of balancing government budgets.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#555

Post by tomhow »

KingMob wrote: post #541
tomhow wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is, at the time of writing, over 48 million posts over nearly two decades. Whatever you want to notice, you'll notice plenty of examples of. So, sure, I guess there has been plenty of "simping" over the years on HN. There has also been plenty of the opposite of it. As someone who reads the comments (particularly the most emotionally charged ones) every day, the sentiment towards prominent tech companies and leader…

If you're focusing on emotionally charged comments, then you're looking at a biased data set, yes? I have you tagged as an admin; have you ever thought of blogging statistical/ML analyses of HN sentiment?

Yep I'm a moderator and we're reading all the threads all the time, so we get a sense of the overall sentiment. Yes we read the worst comments because they're the ones that needour attention with respect to account penalties and bans. But we still read over all the threads, so we'd see it if there was a large "simping" contingent or tred. But we don't see that; what we see instead generally aligns with HN's reputation for being critical, skeptical, cynical and, at times, curmudgeonly. Much that has its roots in HN's "hacker" ethos, which is anti-establishment by definition. There is a good amount of positivity and enthusiasm too, but barely ever for major companies and rich/powerful figures it's most commonly for small teams and freelance/indie developers who have built a cool project or useful tool. We are thinking about what kind of data analysis would be good to publish.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#556

Post by sgt »

Gomotono wrote: post #403
sgt wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did they say that all data centers will move into space? I thought the claim was that it's going to be more and more feasible and profitable to have DC's in space.

Elon Musk is saying this together with Dyson Sphere and Mars colonisation. In his FCC filling he also mentions DCs: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-113A1.pdf And yes its absolutly wild. His Scifi ideas are probably a min of 100 years too early. And while he doesn't even need his own compute (renting out colossus 1 and 2), he thinks we will send server racks full of expensive hardware into space in no ti…

I doubt it'll be traditional server racks. This will be a paradigm shift, for sure. I think he's probably ahead of his time here, but that's usually how it goes.

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#557

Post by KerrickStaley »

kccqzy wrote: post #450
KerrickStaley wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think VGT is a good QQQ replacement. It is based [1] on the MSCI US Investable Market Information Technology 25/50 Index which is free-float adjusted [2] [3], meaning that SpaceX will have a lower weight due to its lower free float. Also, VGT has a substantially lower expense ratio (9 bps / year [4]) than QQQ (18 bps / year [5]). You can compare VGT and QQQ's holdings on these pages [6] [7]. [1] https://fund-docs.v…

No it’s not. When the asset management industry says “information technology” they exclude the technology used for communication. That’s why VGT doesn’t invest in GOOG or META. AMZN is consumer discretionary so it’s also excluded.

Good point; I didn't realize that GOOG/META/AMZN were outside the scope of VGT. Is there a good alternative to QQQ/VGT that you would recommend?

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#558

Post by checkbuzz »

tristanj wrote: post #535
thg wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A fully reusable Starship has a launch cost of around $75m - $90m and the last V3 launch managed 44 tonnes of payload on a sub-orbital flight of not even 200km (Starlink satellites have an orbit of around 550km). That's an optimistic launch cost of $1.700/kg for a rather meaningless altitude and assuming a fully reusable Starship that doesn't keep blowing up. I have no idea where you pulled your $400/kg number from,…

There's so much wrong here, a ton to unpack. > A fully reusable Starship has a launch cost of around $75m - $90m No, that's the Starship build cost , i.e. the cost of an expendable Starship. A fully reusable Starship currently does not exist, but reusable launch cost be around $5m/launch (amortized). > the last V3 launch managed 44 tonnes of payload Intentional, Starship wasn't fully loaded. > on a sub-orbital flight…

Wow. Please tell me this is a joke.

That $75-90 million figure is the current cost to launch Starship. It is also the approximate cost to build Starship. Both of these things are true.

$5 million per launch is an Elon Musk wet dream that's never going to happen. You know like Tesla FSD?

Sure 44 tons to orbit was intentional. You can report back when they intentionally launch 100 tons to orbit. Until then it's just another worthless Musk promise.

The fact that the Falcon 9 and heavy can launch more than 2% of their mass into orbit has no bearing on Starship's capability to do the same.

You're comparing apples with oranges.

Neither of those rockets is fully reusable like Starship. They don't have to carry a return supply of fuel for landing, or a heat shield, landing legs, aerodynamic wings and everything else that's required for full reusability.

And refuelling in orbit is only a minor engineering challenge? That's just hilarious! Try reading something other than Musk's X feed.

I hope you are being facetious at this point. Please don't tell me that you think Starship is fuelled with LNG propellent.

Fuel boil-off in orbit is real, just like it is on the ground. Except in orbit you don't have a big cryogenically cooled tank of propellant to top it up with sitting only 100m away.

Have you ever watched any rocket launch ever? Serious question.

Ever wondered what those huge clouds of vapour are? You know, the ones streaming out of the rocket while it's sitting on the pad ready for launch?

Boy are you in for a big surprise!

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#559

Post by omgwtfbyobbq »

sehansen wrote: post #552
omgwtfbyobbq wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla's EV is worth about the same as the the EV of the term biggest car companies combined. It is highly speculative, but their current new product is the Semi, which started volume production last month, and they have the robotaxi and Optimus in the pipeline. One advantage they have over other manufacturers is their willingness to move into (and out of) adjacent verticals to optimize product cost/design/etc. They c…

European truck manufacturers like MAN and Scania have already had electric semi-trucks on the market for years. And they are selling, the Danish transport giant DSV alone has 400 driving around Europe.

That's about what one company ordered last month (370).

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-massive-order-semi-370-units...

It looks like MAN/Scania combined production last year, including buses, was about 1000.

https://www.sustainabletruckvan.com/traton-scania-man-electr...

Estimates for semi production this year are 5000-15000.

https://sherwood.news/tech/what-we-know-about-teslas-semi-tr...

Re: Danish Pension Blacklists SpaceX over 'Catastrophic Governance'

#560

Post by ninalanyon »

tordrt wrote: post #523
ninalanyon wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Air quality would have been a disaster. What do you mean would have been? It was a disaster. Perhaps you are too young or insufficiently well travelled to have experienced the effects of burning coal in, say the UK in the 1950s and 1960s or in China even in the last few decades. Without oil the push to solar and wind would also have been accelerated, probably. What is it about oil and as that you think made it acce…

Yeah, my point was that it would have been even worse without oil and gas. solar, wind and semiconductors all require a very advanced petrochemical supply chain. You simply couldn't produce any of this without products derived from oil and gas.

> You simply couldn't produce any of this without products derived from oil and gas.

That is simply untrue. Everything that is made from oil or gas can also be made from organic feedstock. I don't mean to say that it would be easy and it would certainly be slower to start with but it is certainly not impossible. Remember that the first plastics were made before the age of oil.

One currently used plastic that does not use oil or gas as a feedstock is cellophane [1], another is rayon [2].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellophane#Today [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayon

Post reply on HN