- cross-posted to:
- enoughmuskspam@lemmy.world
- hakendran@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- enoughmuskspam@lemmy.world
- hakendran@feddit.de
I’ll watch this later when I have enough time. But its important to note that Elon Musk’s aura of invincibility / charity has been pierced, and now big-name talk shows like John Oliver feel safe to actually talk about Musk’s issues now.
I certainly don’t always agree with John Oliver, but this is a huge step forward for the mainstream media to finally start recognizing the Musk problem.
You must log in or register to comment.
Something tells me John Oliver was never afraid to cover this, but Elon Musk has finally had undeserved attention for long enough to become worth covering.
The left still has a bit of a “blindspot” problem. Much like how the right ignores Elon Musk’s antics today, the left was willing to ignore Elon Musk’s antics as long as he represented solar-energy and electric cars.
I don’t know if John Oliver was “afraid” of covering this issue per se. But Musk’s antics were just as bad in the 2018 or earlier periods when he was calling African Americans to work on his Tesla “Planation lines”, anti-union busting back then, etc. etc. Honestly, Elon Musk has been reasonably consistent in my eyes.
All this Twitter thing just made people realize the kind of person Elon Musk is (and always has been). Its brought media attention to Musk because the media used (and still uses) Twitter so much. But I doubt anything in this video is actually new in 2023.
Still, the right has plenty of black-marks to discuss with regards to Elon Musk. The dude is a SV druggie on Weed, Special K, Alcohol, Ambien (and that’s only the publicly known drugs). Twitter was bought out at $54.20, you right-wingers really wanna be representing sky-high MJ smoker here?
(Not “you” in particular, but you in the general sense. The right-wing out there who might read this message, lol). The main problem with Elon Musk is that he holds no loyalties. He’s just doing whatever seems popular right now. His past, and future, will be toxic and inconsistent. He will change his politics on a dime to get what he wants. So yeah, plenty of political hacks trying to take advantage of this in one way or the other.
Still though, John Oliver’s reach cannot be denied. And for the most part, I think most of the causes John Oliver talks about (though left-wing biased) are serious issues in our society worth learning about. But the left/right flip-flop from Elon Musk is well recognized by now, and I’m rather pessimistic about the reasons why the left are suddenly willing to talk about Musk now that he’s undergone the flip/flop. If the left is willing to praise Musk, he’ll go smoke Weed in public or say other left-leaning things just for their praise/support. But if the right starts praising Musk more, he flip-flops to the right instead. A lot of this goes beyond just John Oliver per se (and is likely instead the issues that John Oliver’s writing team researches in the background), but I’m still convinced that this left/right perspective into people is real.
This segment was sort of a let down, because the same lies about reusable rockets were repeated without researching them apparently. Some of musk’s most agreed upon accomplishments were achieved 30-40 years ago, but people on TV can’t help but give him the accolades.
Also not much digging into the Starlink for Ukraine debacle, or the fact that he didn’t actually donate all that hardware, didn’t donate the service, and it wasn’t being used in nearly the capacity initially reported because the people receiving the units were happy to bullshit for him as long as they got gear to use.
the same lies about reusable rockets
What are the lies here? Cause, I tell you what, those rockets sure seem reusable
He didn’t create the first reusable rockets, his company didn’t pioneer reusable rockets, and yet the lie keeps being repeated.
The piece starts with saying that SpaceX just streamlined old NASA technology, that seems to cover your specific complaint here. Did you watch it?
I did, but it seems you didn’t watch the whole thing. I suggest watching it fully, then coming back.
I assert that neither of you watched it. In fact, nobody’s seen it but me
I assert that I didn’t watch it - “This content is not available in your country”.
Do you mind providing additional info on previous reusable rockets. I’m not able to find any successfully reused rockets prior to the Falcon 9.
Edit: The space shuttle doesn’t count as a reusable rocket.
Edit 2: Humanity as only achieved partial reusability so far. SpaceX will likey be the first to achieve full reusability with their Starship. Of course credit for this should not go to Elon but to Gwynne Shotwell and the rest of the SpaceX team.
I love it when you musk simps come through and do this bullshit.
You must have missed the part of my post where I give credit to Shotwell, but just so it’s crystal clear I think Elon is a loser who has stolen his success from the intelligent people who work for him.
Now if you would be so kind as to answer my original question, since I am genuinely curious.
Shotwell is a liar for Musk and just as culpable as him for SpaceX’s marketing liberties.
As for your first (easily researched) question.
First fully private space transport company- OTRAG in 1975
First government “spin-out” Arianespace in 1980
First commercial rocket- Conestoga in 1982
First commercially successful rocket- Pegasus from Orbital Sciences Corporation founded in 1982, IPO in 1990. First Pegasus launch in 1990.
First fully vertically integrated (business) commercial rocket company - Beal Aerospace in 1997
Space Vector was working on DARPA FALCON in 2002 as Musk was looking for staff. Perhaps this is where the name came from?
The reason most companies started focusing on expendable vehicles again was NSDD 42 issued by Reagan in 1982 requesting expendable launch vehicles from suppliers. There was also the issue of needing to launch maximum payload, which made carrying fuel for recovery a non-starter.
Lockheed performed a study on reusability in the 1960s to see if it was economically feasible to reuse launch vehicles for everything from a space station to a moon base. So this idea was not new, not unknown, and not experimented with.
The ROMBUS study from 1964 demonstrated the potential to have reusable orbital modules and shuttles. Launches would use a modular vertical takeoff and landing (stop me when this sounds familiar) system. ROMBUS’s design reads basically like Starship, and it’s from 1964.
SpaceX has failed by their own benchmark to have a commercially viable reusable vehicle, since their refit times are still three weeks and they can’t recover fairings or upper stages still. There’s no cost justification to do this, so it’s an obvious priority to cancel.
Resuable Vehicles
- Russian R-1B missile was fully recoverable and resuable. In 1951.
- X33 VentureStar SSTO
- X34
- X43
- Shuttle first stage
- Shuttle SRB
- SpaceShip One
- SpaceShip Two
- Falcon
- Rotary Rocket Roton SSTO, VTOL
Were all of them viable? No. Is SSTO a fool’s errand? Yes. Is full recovery necessary for lost costs? No. Was SpaceX the first full recovery of the lower stage(s)? No.
If Shuttle doesn’t count as a reusable vehicle, then neither is Starship. Shuttle actively contributed to launch with its own engines and the external tank.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing this very specialized knowledge which would have been very time consuming for me to research myself.
I’m actually pleased with it.
Again, I don’t agree with all of it. In fact, the SpaceX stuff could have easily segue into the ESGHound issues. IE: The old lady’s house who is within a few miles of there because SpaceX rockets are far too large for the land allocated (ex: wildlife sanctuary with dozens of endangered creatures + even humans living close enough to the launch site who have been filing noise complaints).
Elon Musk has stomped over the little people so incredibly that there’s no comparison. Somehow, I do think he’s gone above-and-beyond the typical billionaire in terms of callousness to little people… while John Oliver is kind-of just trying to sell it as typical billionaire crap. No man, its much worse.
Still, this is the first major talk show that has actually talked about the Elon Musk problem. Taking a hard look at something that clearly has been getting worse over the past year (especially). Sure, we at RealTesla have known about this for nearly the past decade and know far worse examples of everything here (Really? OSHA complaints are the worst John Oliver could come up with at the Gigafactory? Nothing about the “Plantation” suit that Tesla just lost?). But its enough to get people’s eyes open to the real harm Elon Musk is doing, and this is all a good conversation starter.
Our arguments here at RealTesla are much better / more appreciated thanks to John Oliver’s video. So yes, its ultimately net good (as this John Oliver video sometimes puts Elon Musk, lol).
I certainly understand that even if they knew all of the Musk BS and scams, they need to ease the general public that does know who Musk is into realizing he’s a dipshit. You can’t just come over the top rope and say this guy that’s in the press all the time is a moron and here’s 30 minutes describing why. So, choosing their battles no doubt.
I liked the segment as a whole, as you can see from the fact I only had two criticisms of it. So I’m not really saying I didn’t like it, just that it could have been more researched. I’m just disappointed that they repeat the same musk lies we continuously see repeated. It lends them credence, and as you see in the comments below people completely believe that SpaceX is the first commercial space company, first reusable rocket, first vertical landing rocket, all the bullshit we know FOR. A. FACT. is a lie. But because Musk’s marketing machine makes people repeat it online, these people fall for it not realizing what they’re doing.
I’m very happy that Rolling Stone, WaPo, NY Times, and Last Week Tonight are exposing Musk for the liar he is. And I have no doubt this is the first of many segments we’ll see over the next several years exposing fraud, deceptive practices, bilking world governments out of untold billions, and who knows what else.
