71–80 of 216 posts
I mean it would look bad if he wasn't aboard, wouldn't it? "Pay lots of money for my space ride [that I'm not going to actually go on myself]"
I don't know, does it look bad for Elon Musk to not go on SpaceX private flights? I would say it doesn't change much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, does it look bad for Elon Musk to not go on SpaceX private flights? I would say it doesn't change much.
People generally dont expect Musk to go to the ISS on Crew Dragon - because he's not an astronaut. But if SpaceX start doing 'space tourism' aimed at general (if somewhat rich) consumers then it would be odd for Musk not to take a ride on that - dont you think? Similarly Branson would be expected to have a go on his space tourism thing once it opens up to the public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've done 14 successful launches. It's probably considerably safer than mountain climbing etc. On the other hand, Blue Origin's competitor Virgin Galactic isn't automated and looks a lot more dangerous.
> considerably safer than mountain climbing I thought that the failure rate for manned missions was accepted to be around 1 crew loss in several hundred flights. That seems much worse than typical mountain climbing, with Everest and K2 being somewhat riskier than space flight on a per-attempt basis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not sure if you’re being sarcastic, but surely taxpayers subsidizing billionaires’ rocket testing and allowing the gains to be privatized is a net loss for society, no?
No. There's no guarantee that taxpayers money would be used for a better endeavor if it was used otherwise. And the very definition of better endeavor is pretty shaky in any case. So one can debate on whether optimal resource allocation is done by the government or private individuals, but it is not 'surely' better to have the government allocate the resources.
Will there be any element of cheap subsidised access to space in return for the government's investment?
Or is it exactly what it seems to be - a no-strings handout?
As for better endeavours - perhaps you're underestimating the economic utility of a single payer health care system which wouldn't bankrupt 500,000 individuals a year. (For example.)
I was a bit shocked how Jeff Bezos looked in the video [0] in which he invited his brother to go with him. He does not look healthy, even a bit bloated. Does anyone know if he is having health issues? [0] https://www.instagram.com/p/CP0MSOqnYEo/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that the new/modern definition of oligarch, or how oligarch is used in US? I dont see how Jeff or Elon are oligarchs in the sense of russian oligarchs.
IMO you have to maintain or exert some control over a nation in order to be an oligarch. So Jeff and Elon are out, but David Koch and Robert Mercer meet the definition for me. These guys have exerted huge control over the US over the last 30-40 years.
I was a bit shocked how Jeff Bezos looked in the video [0] in which he invited his brother to go with him. He does not look healthy, even a bit bloated. Does anyone know if he is having health issues? [0] https://www.instagram.com/p/CP0MSOqnYEo/
Anyone have a study or article of this phenomenon?
An Elon / Jeff space willy-waving contest about who gets to be Space Bro Alpha seems like a net win for humanity
American Oligarchs are certainly up to more interesting things than Russian ones at the moment!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO you have to maintain or exert some control over a nation in order to be an oligarch. So Jeff and Elon are out, but David Koch and Robert Mercer meet the definition for me. These guys have exerted huge control over the US over the last 30-40 years.
Jeff Bezos owns the 2nd largest newspaper in the country, and now a major movie studio. I would say he qualifies.