Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think one of the main reasons that a line gets drawn between Musk and the others is the focus of the business models. While Musk focuses of space station resupply and satellite launch, in addition to "Mars Missions", Branson and Bezos have fully stated that they are in the business of space tourism. Those are very real reasons to draw a line in the sand between SpaceX and Blue Origin and Virgin. As for the founders…
Blue Origin is absolutely doing space exploration work as well. They have multiple contracts with NASA https://www.nasa.gov/subject/5482/blue-origin/
Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
641–650 of 879 posts
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#642Without scale, reporting on donations like this is nothing but PR for the ultra rich. Bezos donated $200M, his net worth: $211 billion Scale that to a normal human’s net worth - let’s take the national average: $121,411 And you see that he just gave away the equivalent of $120 dollars. Barely pocket change.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#643Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many of the decisions that determined whether Amazon would become worth >$1T or yet another mediocre web store were made by warehouse workers? Jeff is primarily responsible for Amazon's success. For making Amazon what it is, him being worth ~10% of the whole company is a totally reasonable compensation
He's entitled to more than your average amazon employee, warehouse worker, and probably any other employee: YEAH sure. But I do not agree on paying such a high premium for simply being a decision maker. I'm merely making an argument that it's hard to objectively determine how much more one employee is entitled to the corporations stock pie than another based on merit. Amazon and it's 800,000 employee base built Amazo…
> I'm willing to bet even if Jeff Bezos is a super employee, one thousand times more productive and smarter, than the next best employee he still couldn't amass 207 billion himself
Being 1000x smarter or more productive isn't why Amazon is with >$1T though, and saying "simply being the decision maker" is very dismissive of the hardest part of his job.
I think it's likely that there were a few (Maybe tens) of key decision that largely determined Amazons trajectory. If Bezos was wrong on those, no >$1T company. That's why he's worth 1000x more.
Sure, employees didn't have the chance to make those decisions themselves but why does that matter? Opportunity will never be equally distributed. Bezos happened to flip 20 heads in a row, and got to reap the rewards.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#644Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Bezos and especially Branson's ventures feel much more like personal vanity projects than something that will actually push space exploration. I'm not sure why people feel this need to draw this weird line in the sand and say that SpaceX is okay because Musk built a business, but Blue Origin and Virgin are bad because... reasons? Technology advances for all sorts of reasons. Lamborghinis exist because a farmer was…
> I'm not sure why people feel this need to draw this weird line in the sand and say that SpaceX is okay because It's because they know exactly what it really means if they cut SpaceX off at the knees and include them. It reveals what they're really saying they want to do. And that's just too far in polite company. With Blue Origin they think they can chop them down and use them as an example and it's ok, because it…
You had an agenda and a point to make. You likely were going to get your anger across no matter what evidence you had to use.
I’m pretty sure at least half the people on HN knew who Jeff Bezos was a decade ago. That’s like saying people on HN don’t know who Jack Dorsey is. Sure he’s not going to be known by name to the average person but that’s not what HN’s crowd is
Is your point against society at large, who don’t fit in with defending Musk and attacking other space billionaires because they don’t really care or know what’s up. Or HNers who as said above, don’t work with what you’re saying.
> What you're witnessing is mimic-based mob behavior in action. That's why it's so irrational, so emotional, so very much not thought-out. It's very predictable, most people that join in likely struggle to control their urge to mimic and join the rage mobs, and it goes after anybody that pops their head up too far. It's what social media is largely filled with today, ignorance and rage mobs. It's probably genetically wired in behavior for some people and then amplified depending on the culture and context.
The vibe given off thru the post and ending with this is hard to distinguish from trolling or inebriated anger posting. Sounds like an exaggerated smartest person in the room take - Vs the rest of us sheep proletariats being too stupid to know right from left.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#645Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Governments actually make the risky investments. Large investments are not the same as risky investments.
Democratic governments make the largest and riskiest investments. I've provided quite a few examples in the last century. Do you have any evidence or theory as to the contrary?
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#646Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, blue origin was founded in 2000 and spacex founded in 2002. Blue origin landed it's first rocket in 2005. It was a tiny rocket and a tiny flight and purely for testing. SpaceX landed it's first rocket in 2015. It was an orbital flight delivering real value. Would it have made sense for SpaceX to stop because blue origin already flew a reusable rocket?
If you're counting Blue Origin's Charon test vehicle, SpaceX had Grasshopper going several years before 2015, and they'd achieved orbit in 2008 already.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#647Earlier quoted context omitted.
I googled "cost of Apollo program" and it comes to $257 billion in today's dollars. Also, the economy was considerably smaller in those days, and so the Apollo program took up a much larger share of it.
> Also, the economy was considerably smaller in those days, and so the Apollo program took up a much larger share of it. Isn't that what adjusting to today's dollars essentially does? Those $28 billion were back then what $257 billion are in today's economy.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#648Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Apollo program was about $120B in today's money all said and done. And that's with 1960's manufacturing processes. The complete Gemini program was about $10B. Blue Origin is up to ~$10B already and hasn't even gone orbital yet.
Why did the Apollo program stop?
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#649Earlier quoted context omitted.
Musk is creating a constellation of satellites that can provide global internet. His technology seems like the only viable way to and back from Mars. Bezos/Branson made a rollercoaster for the super wealthy.
>Musk is creating a constellation of satellites that can provide global internet And is a good example of creating negative externalities, lots of ground based astronomy (a field that has contributed immensely to our collective scientific knowledge and pushed technology advancements forward globally) extremely difficult due to those same satellites that create interference. Yes, global internet is good, but funnily e…
In particular, I do hope the reusable technology benefits people first and then science. I sometimes wonder about how many Einsteins are born and die without ever learning to read. First and foremost, I hope we use this technology to benefit people and science second.
Re: Bezos donates $100M each to CNN contributor Van Jones and chef Jose Andres
#650Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you take the limit of concentrating wealth, you get a dictatorship. Except that's never happened, not even close. Ironically, the modern activists are busy trying to force businesses into getting involved in politics unrelated to their business. This smacks of foolishness to me, as in be careful what one wishes for. > It's hard to believe in democracy and insane wealth concentration at the same time. Wealth in a…
Consolidation of money and power into the hands of a few people is most of the most prevailing trends in history. What do you think a king is? Or a conquerer? Or a Caesar? It strikes me as quite ignorant to posit that wealth and power has never been concentrated into any sort of autocracy. If anything, we live in a unique time and place where military power and financial power are so separated. It is our democratic i…
Caesar gained power through running a business providing people with wine?
> You also seem to completely abandon your previous statement
Not at all. It is obvious that people who became wealthy through force of arms or using taxation to line their pockets are in a different category.