• Inucune@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      NASA is too beholden to politics… You can’t do 7 year builds and missions when the Senate flips every 4 years and has to kill everything the other side did on principle that it has a D or R attached to it. Everything is political.

        • Inucune@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          20 days ago

          It is usually due to “budget cuts” as the easiest way to kill a project is to defend it.

          Juno Jupiter flyby

          Maven mission to mars

          New horizons kbo flyby

          Terra mission-earth science satellite

          Aqua mission -earth science satellite

          DSCOVR

          SLS-which may actually be a bad program but is a good example of the political issues with NASA vs senate.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    22 days ago

    You could always just fund the space agency you already have, instead of funneling money to a foreign billionaire.

    • TronBronson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 days ago

      No this the one time I’m with the commies. Nationalize that shit. Like you said it’s all taxpayer money anyway. A little bit of Wall Street speculation, but who gives a fuck about those people

      • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 days ago

        NASA was always there and they couldn’t achieve what SpaceX has while simultaneously having a lot more capital to do so. I’m sorry but if there’s any proof that private sector’s self interest is a better driver of innovation than common interest SpaceX is it. This is a terrible idea that sounds like a good idea if you do not understand how good Musk was and is at cutting costs. That’s his actual real skill in business and is well documented. Doesn’t make him less of a prick but you also cannot downplay what he has achieved with this company.

        • Senal@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 days ago

          You mean the NASA who landed people on the moon?

          So let’s assume you aren’t a moon landing denier and use that as a baseline, NASA is clearly capable of things given the right circumstances and budget.

          SpaceX benefited from his reputation and money, because they sure as shit didn’t benefit from his technical acumen.

          Business wise he is successful because he’s rich and influential and that works to mitigate how shitty he is at actually running an organisation, that doesn’t mean he has skills as a business person that means he has money and influence, in his case originally from the mine, then from buying and bullying his was in to businesses that were technologically sound and boosting them with his money.

          You could make an argument he’s a relatively good investor, but he’s an actively bad CEO.

          • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            22 days ago

            They landed people on the moon and then did fuck all for decades.

            When Musk started SpaceX he was not well known yet, SpaceX came before Tesla.

            He was able to get into the businesses he has because he was rich yes, but you can find many accounts of engineers that worked under him speak of how good he was at finding ways to cut unnecessary costs.

            He’s not a technical genius that’s for sure. But he has been a good CEO for SpaceX. Terrible one for Tesla though, mostly because he bought into his own myth and became a drug addict. But I refuse to simply wave away his achievements simply because I don’t like him. I can not like someone and still acknowledge they have done something good.

            • Senal@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              22 days ago

              They landed people on the moon and then did fuck all for decades.

              Indeed, all i was saying is that they were capable given budget and circumstances.

              That budget and direction comes from the government.

              When Musk started SpaceX he was not well known yet, SpaceX came before Tesla.

              I will admit, i thought spacex was just another company he bought his way in to, like tesla, seems i was mistaken about that.

              He was able to get into the businesses he has because he was rich yes, but you can find many accounts of engineers that worked under him speak of how good he was at finding ways to cut unnecessary costs.

              And you can equally find many accounts of having to distract him from the day to day operations because he’s unreliable , unpredictable and chaotic (none of those meant in a good way).

              He’s also known for buying good press and using litigation to silence people.

              He’s not a technical genius that’s for sure. But he has been a good CEO for SpaceX.

              I doubt this, but that could just be bias, i don’t have any actual evidence of the long term impact of him as CEO.

              Recently though, he’s provably been significantly more of a liability than a benefit, even if just from a PR and public sentiment point of view.

              But I refuse to simply wave away his achievements simply because I don’t like him. I can not like someone and still acknowledge they have done something good.

              Indeed, i push back on the myth that he’s some self made tony stark genius, but it isn’t like he’s not achieved anything.

              I would personally attribute most of that to neptoism, wealth, luck and opportunity, but that doesn’t remove the achievement itself.

        • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 days ago

          The agency that landed people on the moon so long ago most of the people involved have died if old age, and the event will soon pass out of living memory?

          The one where when they let a single rocket explode, one time, rocked the nation, because their record was so close to flawless?

          The one that constantly gives us new sources for scientific data?

          Yeah fuck them. They never made a dick rocket.

          • cole@lemdro.id
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 days ago

            I’m sorry… dick rocket? Your issue with SpaceX is that the rockets are… rocket shaped?

            Like everything else notwithstanding, physics dictates the shapes of these things. That is why they all look rather… dick-ish

  • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    21 days ago

    That would literally be the worse thing that could happen with regards to them, because they only exist and thrived because they are private enterprise. If the government were capable of doing what those companies do and doing it well, SpaceX and Starlink wouldn’t exist in the first place.

    Can you even imagine just how much money would be wasted and misused and unaccounted for, while nothing actually got done?

    Anyone who thinks this is a good idea is delusional

    • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      21 days ago

      Please. They only exist because of government funding. If NASA had as many rockets explode as SpaceX has, people like you would be screaming about the waste of taxpayer dollars.

      Also, it’s only a matter of time before starlink satellites crash into each other and start a chain reaction. You can kiss space travel goodbye after that.

      • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 days ago

        If NASA had as many rockets explode as SpaceX has, people like you would be screaming about the waste of taxpayer dollars.

        The point of the launches that have ended in explosion were to test various parts of the systems and hardware, and to learn if/when a “disaster” does happen. That’s how you improve things, make them better and safer. Would you prefer when we finally send people to the moon or to Mars that it’s the first time we’ve launched that rocket? Those explosions weren’t bad things.

        • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          Are you for real? Can you guess how many Saturn V rockets ended up exploding throughout the first mission to put man on the moon? Trick question, the answer was ZERO.

          The Saturn V program had completed more successful milestones in 1 year than SpaceX has managed in 5 year.

          SpaceX has been late on every single deliverable to NASA. They were supposed to show they can reliably perform the propellant transfer for the NASA contract, and instead Musk focused on testing the deployment of starlink satellites, which of course failed. And now they lost one more on the pad getting fueled up.

          It’s complete incompetence, which is the one thing Musk can guarantee

          • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 days ago

            How many of those Saturn V rockets landed themselves back on the launch pad?

            NASAs milestones were not the same as, nor anywhere near as hard as, SpaceX’s.

            Your incompetence line shows you’re not capable of being impartial in this so there’s no real point continuing. You’re saying the guy responsible for the EV market we have no, the almost fully self driving cars we have now, the satellite internet network we have now, and the reusable spaceship booster rockets we have now is “incompetent”. You’re not here to actually have a discussion.