Comment by Robotbeat | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Robotbeat | Hacker News Reader

I’ve been waiting for this for a while. This is a really good market niche. And being human spaceflight capable is also really good.

Peter Beck, who once claimed he’d eat his hat if they made a reusable rocket, sure made a big 180 on the topic, and I couldn’t be happier! Speaking of, watch the announcement video: https://youtu.be/agqxJw5ISdk

I’m also GLAD they copied the Falcon 9 design (which is as old as scifi and was demonstrated by DC-X and Masten Space Systems and Armadillo Aerospace) for the first stage landing concept. Better to use what works instead of just making a novel approach just for the sake of novelty or Not Invented Here. Rockets ought to land on a pillar of flame like God and Heinlein (EDIT: and apparently the Soviet Cosmists) intended: https://youtu.be/TdSxDNnqRlo

Also, RocketLab has a TON of ex-SpaceXer employees... I’ve long said that the high churn (for aerospace, but not any higher than typical tech company) of SpaceX, while not necessarily really good for SpaceX, is really good for the industry as a whole.

Elon Musk is really shooting for a self-sustaining city on Mars and SpaceX is his part of working towards that goal. He really is happy for competition and wishes there was more of it. He has stated that he is sometimes concerned that SpaceX has too many of the best people. With these other rocket companies doing well and drawing top talent, he is probably less concerned about that at this point.

Something tells me he's going to be perfectly content to settle for richest man on Earth.

What’s that something? His recent getting rid of possessions says he doesn’t care much...

Honestly it was a lazy comment and I should've deleted it. Rather than derail this thread with an argument about Musk, I genuinely encourage you to downvote that comment (if you hadn't already replied to it I'd delete it).

If he didn't care much, he wouldn't be the richest man on earth.

Absolutely no one would have ever suggested that electric cars and rockets were the way to become rich. Instead back when he invested in and or started these companies people would have told him it was a quick way to become poor. I really dont think he was ever seeking becoming the richest person in the world.

He didn't start Tesla and SpaceX was possible because of NASA's program to create a market for a private space industry. Both are heavily government subsidized enterprises. If I was a betting man, building government subsidized companies does not seem like a way to become poor.

By selling his houses in California and moving to Texas he reportedly will save billions in taxes.

If he didn't care about money he would pay his employees a fair wage and provide a safe working environment.

I really don't agree.

Anyone motivated by money would have stopped working that hard many, many Billions ago.

Look at all the other billionaires: This is just simply not true. They can never have enough. Their net worth is a high score to them and is an end unto itself.

I'm sure he's motivated by other stuff too but he's very clearly also motivated by wealth accumulation to some degree.

Only in that is gives power to make change.

Other billionaires I guess. I'm sure they get more sleep and weekends though.

My take is Elon's goals on wealth accumulation are so that he can put capital back into the projects he cares about - he isn't accumulating for the sake of wealth.

I would argue that many of the billionaire class (outside of wall street) are more interested in their projects and goals than strictly capital accumulation. Especially those who have signed off on donating a majority of their wealth after their death.

I think what Elon wants, money alone can't buy. It's taking him time and effort, as well as money, to help humans to become a multi-planetary species. This drive is why I've been a fan of Elon for so long.

> He really is happy for competition and wishes there was more of it.

Only if the competition is mediocre. If the competition takes away money, attention and admiration from Elon, he will not be happy.

I doubt it.

RocketLab has already been doing that, and he still has praised it.

Musk doesn’t have to be your villain to be an imperfect person.

I found it odd with all the focus he has had on Mars and how often he tweets, he tweeted nothing about NASA's success of its recent landing.

You miss this? https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1362726185931857925?s=20

Yes, I didn't see it on his page, that is good to see.

I've got a feeling that Elon is the kind of person who would only be happy with death on a battlefield, bested by a worthy opponent.

He started out trying to blow some money to get a green house to Mars. His goal was to get enough interest to start another space race to Mars. If someone else gets there first I think he has achieved his original goal.

Rocket Lab is an excellent company that makes innovative rockets: flying electric pump fed engines, carbon fiber frames and 3D printed Inconel engines all the way to orbit. They've achieved a high flight rate and a nice niche for themselves in a area where SpaceX themselves have moved away from.

Rocket Lab deserves the praise it receives. More so than Blue Origin, an older company whith grander ambitions but has been unable to execute on anything beyond a few small scale suborbital hops. Their methalox BE-4 engine is admittedly pretty cool though.

It seems Blue Origin has gone almost full SLS with their New Glenn. So different from SpaceX. The approaches could not be more different: 1. spend a lot of money on first-time-right, making no money in the process and having all risk at the end (while trying to lower it on paper). Big kudos to BO if sticks the first landing (my bet is that the first will not land OK)

vs

2. Design for first-time-close enough, spend a lot of money on many relatively cheap-ish prototypes that get blown up but improve each time. While making money with a less (but still) ambitious design

But BO has some beautiful factories built for New Glenn, whereas SpaceX is building Starship in tents. Elon says that the factory is 10-100x as hard as the prototype, so New Glenn must be way ahead of Starship, right? /s

Beautiful empty factories, it seems.

It is pretty risky publicly betting on some technological progress not happening :) At least if no known laws of physics would be broken by achieving said progress.

I've never seen anyone big enough to actually follow through on eating a hat. Props Peter Beck.

I doubt he ate a whole hat. He probably just put a bit of a hat into his mouth without eating it.

He showed it. I take the video to be accurate (he really did eat a small part, but not the whole thing), and not misleading. I’ve eaten much worse. Now if only more people would be as willing to correct course when their previous opinion was proven incorrect. This alone is one reason I really like Peter Beck.

I mean, there's a dude who ate an airplane.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Lotito

Werner Herzog ate his shoe:

"In 1979, Les Blank took a detour to film German filmmaker Werner Herzog honoring a vow he made to Errol Morris that he (Herzog) would eat his shoe if Morris ever actually made one of his films he was forever talking about. Stung to action, Morris directed Gates of Heaven and Herzog, true to his word, returned to Berkeley to consume one of his desert boots at the UC Theater. Blank's film documents Herzog's strongly expressed belief that people must have the gutts to attempt what they dream of."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGcWTIWYDMQ (just the lead-up..)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kii4jQ7XHuY (shoe-eating..)

Scott Alexander at least chomped on his hat in response to this 2017 incident involving Maciej Ceglowski:

> 12. (4/9/17) G.K Chesterton On AI Risk was an April Fools’ joke and not meant seriously. But it did criticize Maciej Ceglowski’s piece where he accused singularitarians of not caring enough about the poor. The fake Chesterton of the piece said that if Ceglowski himself gave to charity at the same level as the people he was criticizing, he would “eat his hat”. Ceglowski pointed out that he does indeed give a lot of money to charity, including a $15,000 donation last year. Under the circumstances, I felt honor-bound to eat my hat and post a video of it on Twitter.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/04/01/g-k-chesterton-on-ai-r... https://twitter.com/Pinboard/status/848396684862275584

I think you intended to link to a different video showing rockets landing on pillars of flames. Can you edit your comment or drop the real video link because I’m very intrigued?

I fixed it. :) https://youtu.be/TdSxDNnqRlo

And Buck Rogers comics from the 30's had tail-sitters before Heinlein. Some were rockets (tractor, from the nose) and some "ultronium" antigravity.

http://nick-stevens.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/buck-roge...

> And being human spaceflight capable is also really good.

What does that even mean? Going threw the NASA certification? Why would NASA even do that?

There is capsule that could even launch on the rocket that currently exists.

We will see if it is a good market and if they will be able to execute.

I think it requires a safety factor of >1.4 for every part.

Lots of stuff:

https://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t=NPR&c=8705&s=2...

But even if you design to those standards, doesn't mean you will actually get certified.

And as SpaceX learned, the interpretation of those specification are not easy.

So if you just build something without constantly working with NASA, and have their cooperation, you are unlikely to get certified.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com