• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla II

It's fairly obvious from the context that GF is talking about Starship specifically, not SpaceX generally.
GF has been telling ridiculous lies about SpaceX since the inception of this thread. As far as I can tell, this is simply another one of them.

And it doesn't even make sense. SpaceX has clearly mastered the process of getting second stages and payloads into orbit. Putting Starship (a combined second stage/payload, not unlike literally every other such stack in the history of rocketry) into orbit isn't the challenge. It's just what GF has fixated on in his latest round of lies about SpaceX. The challenge here is everything else about Starship: Returning the combined stack to Earth in a reusable condition. It's no surprise they're focusing on that part of the mission profile, rather than the part they've already mastered.

---

Incidentally, the STS underwent crewed testing because it was never designed to operate uncrewed. NASA had no other option. Nowadays, it makes more sense to design for automated flight, greatly reducing cost and risk during the testing phase.
 
Nobody else is bleating on about fast iterative design despite manifestly not being able to pull it off.
Moving the goalposts. A moment ago you were all about comparing SpaceX to its peers. But now we're back to acknowledging that SpaceX performs well in comparison to its peers, suddenly we're supposed to compare it to the aspirational bloviating of its deranged CEO.

Personally, I think it makes more sense to compare SpaceX to its peers, and what it's actually committed to its customers, but either way I'd prefer to stick to one comparison at a time. If you didn't mean to compare SpaceX's work on Artemis to other aerospace programs and projects, then don't do that. Especially don't do that and then change the basis when you don't like how the comparison you chose makes SpaceX look good.
 
which NASA was able to do in the Apollo era without expensive full on launches.
Actually ... NASA switched to all-up testing in order to accelerate development of the Saturn V.

Snapshot from Apollo: The All-Up Testing Decision: (ttps://appel.nasa.gov/2010/02/25/ao_1-7_f_snapshot-html/)

I am not a fan of Musk and I have been critical of some things SpaceX has done. But, comparing a (mostly) privately-funded development of a rocket to the massive amount of public funds and resources devoted to Apollo is not a fair comparison.
 
It is not just not a good look, it is a very bad look for a CEO to be a really good player in a game that is a massive time sink - in a sane world that is.
Well not only the one game, he claimed a top 20 position with Diablo 4. I suppose it is good news in one way that he cheats so he isn’t sinking all his time into games, but it really should worry his companies and shareholders that he is willing to not only lie but boast about it. It also shows he is rather stupid if he thought he could get away with this.
 
Well not only the one game, he claimed a top 20 position with Diablo 4. I suppose it is good news in one way that he cheats so he isn’t sinking all his time into games, but it really should worry his companies and shareholders that he is willing to not only lie but boast about it. It also shows he is rather stupid if he thought he could get away with this.

It's also really ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ lame lol. The whole point of putting in the time and effort to make leaderboards is to flex that you know the game. I'd be embarrassed if I got caught with a purchased toon. Make no mistake, I've bought and sold toons on Everquest a bunch, but I already knew how to play the classes I bought. I wish I could see him get called out in-game for it but I don't play diablo so I'm not sure how it works.
 
Investors, by and large, are idiots - remember how impressed their were that Bankman-Fried would play videogames while on important conference calls?
 
Well not only the one game, he claimed a top 20 position with Diablo 4. I suppose it is good news in one way that he cheats so he isn’t sinking all his time into games, but it really should worry his companies and shareholders that he is willing to not only lie but boast about it. It also shows he is rather stupid if he thought he could get away with this.

the only thing we know for sure is he spends a relatively significant amount of time on twitter at all hours of the day and night. of all the things he’s faking, being addicted to social media isn’t one of them.
 
It pretty much is proven.




This is the puzzling thing. Nobody would think the worse of Elon Musk if he just played the games casually or not at all. Whether you think he is cheating or not, it isn't a good look for a CEO of two multi-billion dollar companies.


It seems to be important to Elon Musk.
The thing is, the PoE2 kerfuffle exposes that he probably has never seriously played any of the games he's boasted about being a top player at. The fact that he's clearly got others to build his PoE2 character for him to boast of, plus the fact that he doesn't understand PoE concepts that are shared with Diablo, puts everything else into serious question (though him boasting of his character caster loaded up with melee armour and garbage tier caster weapons for Elden Ring a few years ago should have given that game away).
 
I assume he will get banned from all these games, as he is clearly in violation of the User Agreements....
I heard his PoE player has been perma-killed off. All my gamer friends are laughing so hard over this. In my book, it's just another way in which Musk has beclowned himself by bluffing his way through something he clearly doesn't know anything about. And yes, I struggle to understand how someone who purportedly runs two global-scale companies and is co-leader of a "department" of the U.S. government has time both to be on social media at all hours of the day and night and attain expert-level proficiency at a game that takes huge amounts of gameplay. I'm only part owner of a small company, and I barely have time to argue with Apollo hoax nut jobs. I guess I'm just not the galaxy brain Musk is.
 
Yes, his 'hardcore' player got killed on a rift raid.

On hardcore, when you are dead you are dead.

A good look at his feeble grasp of the game here from an experienced PoE player here



 
A good look at his feeble grasp of the game here from an experienced PoE player here...
Indeed, one of my prep bartenders is an avid gamer and walked me through a couple of those videos yesterday over the lunch hour.

The broader lesson is one that so many fringe claimants here either learn the hard way or fail altogether to learn: it really is possible for people to tell that you're bluffing. We just got done over at ApolloHoax.net answering our first conspiracy theorist in what seemed like years. As often happens in that genre, the claimant came to the table with all kinds of claims to expertise and inherent knowledge that he was ultimately unable to substantiate, and so got his head handed to him by the very competent regulars there. It never fails to amuse me just how many people really think they can B.S. their way along indefinitely.

Elon Musk seems to have honed his B.S. to the point where it has earned him quite a lot of wealth (if only on paper) and quite a lot of undeserved credibility. But despite any legitimate skill or knowledge he might have, he shares an annoying trait with the run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorists who all imagine themselves to be galaxy-brained geniuses, and who generally stay inside their echo chambers. It's one thing when he's harmlessly claiming personal credit for everything that SpaceX and Tesla have done. The SpaceX people I know just sort of laugh, shake their heads, and then go back to work doing exciting things. I've read that these companies have what amount to fidget-spinner employees whose main job is to keep Musk busy and prevent him from meddling in any of the important bits.

What scares me on the other hand is Musk the Chronic Liar being given power in situations where "Move fast and break things" has consequences more grave and far-reaching that just driving X/Twitter into the ground and moving on. The vibe in Silicon Valley in the 90s (and I was there to experience it) was basically if you flew your company into the mountain, you could have another one up and running inside a month and your finances wouldn't even feel a speed bump. Giving him power in the U.S. government to enact changes that have the equivalent consequences of perma-death in a game—only with the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans—is to me an incredibly foolish thing to do.

There's a chapter in the book Coders that examines the tech-bro approach to sociology and government (including the rise of social media) and concludes that these people should be kept as far as possible away from unchecked power.
 
Looks like the critical part of the maiden flight of the New Glenn rocket was successful. That means that Bezos's company has a rocket that can lift 45 tons of cargo into orbit, double that what a Falcon 9 can.
Blue Origin did not recover the booster, as was planned.
 
Indeed, one of my prep bartenders is an avid gamer and walked me through a couple of those videos yesterday over the lunch hour.

The broader lesson is one that so many fringe claimants here either learn the hard way or fail altogether to learn: it really is possible for people to tell that you're bluffing. We just got done over at ApolloHoax.net answering our first conspiracy theorist in what seemed like years. As often happens in that genre, the claimant came to the table with all kinds of claims to expertise and inherent knowledge that he was ultimately unable to substantiate, and so got his head handed to him by the very competent regulars there. It never fails to amuse me just how many people really think they can B.S. their way along indefinitely.

Elon Musk seems to have honed his B.S. to the point where it has earned him quite a lot of wealth (if only on paper) and quite a lot of undeserved credibility. But despite any legitimate skill or knowledge he might have, he shares an annoying trait with the run-of-the-mill conspiracy theorists who all imagine themselves to be galaxy-brained geniuses, and who generally stay inside their echo chambers. It's one thing when he's harmlessly claiming personal credit for everything that SpaceX and Tesla have done. The SpaceX people I know just sort of laugh, shake their heads, and then go back to work doing exciting things. I've read that these companies have what amount to fidget-spinner employees whose main job is to keep Musk busy and prevent him from meddling in any of the important bits.

What scares me on the other hand is Musk the Chronic Liar being given power in situations where "Move fast and break things" has consequences more grave and far-reaching that just driving X/Twitter into the ground and moving on. The vibe in Silicon Valley in the 90s (and I was there to experience it) was basically if you flew your company into the mountain, you could have another one up and running inside a month and your finances wouldn't even feel a speed bump. Giving him power in the U.S. government to enact changes that have the equivalent consequences of perma-death in a game—only with the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans—is to me an incredibly foolish thing to do.

There's a chapter in the book Coders that examines the tech-bro approach to sociology and government (including the rise of social media) and concludes that these people should be kept as far as possible away from unchecked power.
Hi Jay, is this the book?
 
Hi Jay, is this the book?
Yes, that's the one I mean. Chapter 10 "Scale, Trolls, and Big Tech" contains the bulk of the author's analysis arguing that "tech bros" generally have social and ethical blind spots that result in their inability to provide leadership through real-world problems. He cites the source of this blind spot as the immersion in a purely technical environment built largely out of artificial engineering constructs: a world of pure logic, technical problem-solving, youthful exuberance, and a view of the world generally limited to the college campus. He then goes on to outline how these forces had to be reigned in and controlled in order to alleviate much larger social catastrophes.
 
Last edited:
Looks like the critical part of the maiden flight of the New Glenn rocket was successful. That means that Bezos's company has a rocket that can lift 45 tons of cargo into orbit, double that what a Falcon 9 can.
Blue Origin did not recover the booster, as was planned.
Impressive. It's way more than ULA's aging Atlas V heavy launch vehicle. It's even more than ULA's brand new Vulcan Centaur heavy launch vehicle. But it's still less than SpaceX's Falcon Heavy heavy launch vehicle.

And of course it's still less than SpaceX's Starship payload capacity. Normally I'd wait until a new rocket actually delivered a payload for a paying customer. You didn't wait, though, so I figured it would be okay if I went ahead.

Why is it that with all the valid reasons to dislike Elon Musk, people still feel compelled to lie and make stuff up about how bad he is?
 
Delivering any payload to orbit on your first flight is a monumental achievement. Even more so for a vehicle this size.

I suspect people are inclined to make up stuff about how bad Elon Musk is because he's so willing to make up stuff about how good he is. Not that either is beneficial, but if someone wants to start a personality cult, the expected outcome will include unfair comment.
 
It is a very refreshing change to have something work without all the hype.
Bezos is putting himself up as the reliable Space Trucker, unlike the chaotic hotshot Musk who will always promise more sooner and deliver less later.
 
Delivering any payload to orbit on your first flight is a monumental achievement. Even more so for a vehicle this size.
I'm not throwing shade on Blue Origin's achievement. I think it's great, and I look forward to seeing more of the same from them. My objection is that TGZ is perverting a legitimate cause for celebration into another brick in a wall of hate.
I suspect people are inclined to make up stuff about how bad Elon Musk is because he's so willing to make up stuff about how good he is. Not that either is beneficial, but if someone wants to start a personality cult, the expected outcome will include unfair comment.
That's no excuse for bad behavior.
 
Do you consider false claims of personal competence or success to be good behavior?
Mu.

I'm talking about people who are inspired by Musk's behavior to tell lies about SpaceX. Telling lies about SpaceX is bad behavior. Taking Elon Musk as your Hate Muse doesn't excuse telling lies about SpaceX. Why do people do it? Because Musk is so hateable that they can't help themselves? Or because they believe that Musk is so hateable that it gives them a free pass to tell lies about SpaceX?
 

angry at the coverage of his red hand in the cookie jar live streaming on a boosted account, elon musk squabbles with and takes blue check mark, and leaks dms between him and asmongold. this is somewhat notable because, one, it’s extremely petty and bitch made. and two, asmongold is a bit of a well liked figure amongst the younger alt right-ish musk friendly demographic of gamer
 
Well, the question is: how close is Musk to SpaceX?
If you want to separate the company from Musk's bad behavior, then we also can't give him any credit for their work.
Otherwise, it is fair game: if Musk gets to lie about SpaceX, then so does everybody else, without even committing fraud.
 
Because it's a red herring. And because I've already stipulated to Musk's bad behavior many times in this thread. And because my opinion of Musk's behavior does nothing to address the issue of people lying about SpaceX because of how much they object to Musk's behavior. Which brings us back to it's a red herring.
 
Because it's a red herring.
Not if you phrase your disapprobation as a moral absolute.

And because I've already stipulated to Musk's bad behavior many times in this thread.
But you seem indifferent to its consequences.

And because my opinion of Musk's behavior does nothing to address the issue of people lying about SpaceX...
Your willingness to apply a fair standard beyond mere lip service applies to the moral justification for your indignance.
 
Looks like the critical part of the maiden flight of the New Glenn rocket was successful. That means that Bezos's company has a rocket that can lift 45 tons of cargo into orbit, double that what a Falcon 9 can.
Blue Origin did not recover the booster, as was planned.

It was "planned" in the sense they didn't expect success, but they were attempting booster recovery on this flight.
 
Last edited:
On the other hand, they appear to have caught the booster again flawlessly. So there's that.
Flawlessly and impressively. The shock waves during re-entry were absolutely beautiful. I admit it makes me cringe to see a giant booster swinging back and forth from anything, but in this case it's the good kind of cringe.
 
Flawlessly and impressively. The shock waves during re-entry were absolutely beautiful. I admit it makes me cringe to see a giant booster swinging back and forth from anything, but in this case it's the good kind of cringe.
The capture of the booster was amazing. It looks almost as though it is routine now.

There's no doubt that this is a further advance, which is great. That said, there will clearly be some kind of delay from the break up.
 
Back
Top Bottom