Elon Musk's lies, propaganda, etc. - Page 60
Forum Index > General Forum |
Harris1st
Germany6687 Posts
| ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland23678 Posts
On February 07 2025 21:11 Harris1st wrote: One of the few occasions where Reddit is really shining. There is a bunch of hilarious memes in subreddits like r\swasticars and the likes Haha aye there’s some good work there! | ||
KT_Elwood
674 Posts
Wonder which it might be? | ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland23678 Posts
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/10/science/boeing-nasa-space-launch-system-sls/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/10/science/boeing-nasa-space-launch-system-sls/index.html I think this is one I wouldn’t generally have a problem with if it weren’t for the rather obvious conflicts of interest afoot. | ||
Acrofales
Spain17815 Posts
On February 11 2025 19:59 WombaT wrote: A few links for the above: https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/10/science/boeing-nasa-space-launch-system-sls/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/10/science/boeing-nasa-space-launch-system-sls/index.html I think this is one I wouldn’t generally have a problem with if it weren’t for the rather obvious conflicts of interest afoot. SLS has been a disaster of a project. Then again, starship is not far behind it in budget overrun or failed promises. Seems the best idea at this point is to revive Saturn and call it a day. | ||
KT_Elwood
674 Posts
The fucking irony in this is just too much. | ||
oBlade
United States5244 Posts
On February 11 2025 19:47 KT_Elwood wrote: Budget cuts to NASA cause Boeong to axe the SLS rocket, costing 400 jobs and leaving the field wide open for a certain company to fill the gap of a giant moon rocket. Wonder which it might be? Probably a cheaper, better one? SLS is a 20 year old plan to build a jobs program around a 70s/80s platform, and has still managed to fly all of one times. Moreover Boeing doesn't even have a lander, which is what you need to justify the entire enterprise of making a "moon" rocket. | ||
KT_Elwood
674 Posts
SpaceX launched 4-5 missions beyond earths orbit. All of them with payload build by somebody else. It's fair to have competition.. but having the guy owning the competitor decide if Boeing is good enough stinks. Having Boeing just fold and bend over is terrifiying for what's about to come. | ||
oBlade
United States5244 Posts
On February 14 2025 19:27 KT_Elwood wrote: SpaceX also doesn't have a lander. They have big ships that explode on starting.. or landing. SpaceX has an HLS contract. If you want to reevaluate that separately, I'm all for it. ULA has never landed a first stage on Earth. Landing on the moon is a great deal easier due to there being no atmosphere. Mars is the hardest due to there being some atmosphere. The moon has been a fake mirage destination for decades to begin with. Nobody actually wants to go back to the moon. They want to sell the dream of going back to the moon to make pork project jobs programs for their constituents, or their company, as the case may be. Probably NASA will refocus to Mars. On February 14 2025 19:27 KT_Elwood wrote: SpaceX launched 4-5 missions beyond earths orbit. All of them with payload build by somebody else. Governments are the only entities to conduct missions outside of Earth orbit due to the fact that there is no economic incentive to do so, only scientific or exploration/wow humanity reasons. Anyone else who does is either doing charity or demonstration or throwing money away. On February 14 2025 19:27 KT_Elwood wrote: It's fair to have competition.. but having the guy owning the competitor decide if Boeing is good enough stinks. Having Boeing just fold and bend over is terrifiying for what's about to come. Do you have a single piece of evidence Musk ordered the cancelation of SLS? I don't know how well you know the US system. NASA is not part of the Constitution. Most countries do not actually have space programs. Countries develop programs when they want to do something. If they want to go to the moon, or Mars, they would have to make a program for that. Countries likewise don't have infinite money. Then they need to buy things from companies, making them a customer. Neither the company has an inherent right to the government's business at the company's preferred conditions, nor does the government have an inherent right to the company's product if it doesn't meet their conditions. If NASA doesn't have enough money to buy A, they can buy an alternative or buy nothing. If A is too expensive for NASA to buy, company can make it better or cheaper which they've had 20 fucking years to do. Like if you ask someone to paint your house, and they say it will be $100, and you pay them, and they say actually they need $200, and you pay them, and they paint a little bit, and they say now they need $500, and your expenses change and you quit the whole endeavor, it is not on the painter to "just fold and bend over" or not. Are they going to extort you even more? | ||
Simberto
Germany11305 Posts
On February 14 2025 23:24 oBlade wrote: SpaceX has an HLS contract. If you want to reevaluate that separately, I'm all for it. ULA has never landed a first stage on Earth. Landing on the moon is a great deal easier due to there being no atmosphere. Mars is the hardest due to there being some atmosphere. The moon has been a fake mirage destination for decades to begin with. Nobody actually wants to go back to the moon. They want to sell the dream of going back to the moon to make pork project jobs programs for their constituents, or their company, as the case may be. Probably NASA will refocus to Mars. Governments are the only entities to conduct missions outside of Earth orbit due to the fact that there is no economic incentive to do so, only scientific or exploration/wow humanity reasons. Anyone else who does is either doing charity or demonstration or throwing money away. Do you have a single piece of evidence Musk ordered the cancelation of SLS? I don't know how well you know the US system. NASA is not part of the Constitution. Most countries do not actually have space programs. Countries develop programs when they want to do something. If they want to go to the moon, or Mars, they would have to make a program for that. Countries likewise don't have infinite money. Then they need to buy things from companies, making them a customer. Neither the company has an inherent right to the government's business at the company's preferred conditions, nor does the government have an inherent right to the company's product if it doesn't meet their conditions. If NASA doesn't have enough money to buy A, they can buy an alternative or buy nothing. If A is too expensive for NASA to buy, company can make it better or cheaper which they've had 20 fucking years to do. Like if you ask someone to paint your house, and they say it will be $100, and you pay them, and they say actually they need $200, and you pay them, and they paint a little bit, and they say now they need $500, and your expenses change and you quit the whole endeavor, it is not on the painter to "just fold and bend over" or not. Are they going to extort you even more? And you don't think it is a problem if a guy with a rocket company is directly involved in decisions about what rockets the government should buy? Imo such a person shouldn't be anywhere near such decisions. Even if he were not to influence them in any way, it still looks like corruption. And currently, Musk is going around the government firing people (or getting them fired) left and right for whatever reasons he sees fit. Do you think there might be some incentive for people who want to keep their jobs to do stuff Musk likes? Like making sure Musk gets more government money? You really don't see how people could view that as problematic? | ||
KT_Elwood
674 Posts
Everything is riding on the 2026 budget and the Artemis mission. If it's not enough.. they axe SLS and with it Boeing. Boeing is expecting the budget cut and prepares of layoffs In control of that is....Trump. Or DOGE.. or whatever. Nobody knows.. why does nobody know? Because it's more efficient. Maybe I can look that up on X. As Harry Bolz said, he reports everything DOGE does on X. But I don't have an X. And with the Account-Wall I can't access X stuff. Maybe I need to become another happy customer at Harry Bolz X service to read about Harry Bollz DOGE budget for NASA. There is zero conflict of interest! Very good! | ||
oBlade
United States5244 Posts
| ||
Acrofales
Spain17815 Posts
On February 15 2025 03:36 oBlade wrote: You can take Musk away from NASA 100%. Fine. It's a conflict of interest. I agree 100%. Trump said "we would not let him do that segment or look in that area." If Trump reneges on that, or if Musk is stupid enough to approach NASA despite the glaring conflict, yet alone appearance of impropriety, they're assholes for that. Nonetheless Trump is not Musk and has a right to his own space policy. It is not Musk's fault that ULA's rockets are more expensive and worse, if that's what's going on. It's ULA's fault. You do not need to make the US taxpayer buy a more expensive thing just to keep up appearances. Calling Starship more successful than SLS is a stretch in any sense of the word. But it'd be fair to say they are both abject failures. The only thing Starship has going for it is that they don't work with a Cost+ contract, so if they spend a couple of dozen billion dollars more than budgeted that comes from private investors. Of course, you also run the risk that SpaceX goes bankrupt before delivering a functional Starship. At least with SLS you will eventually have both the rocket and the technology. It might cost 5x as much as initially budgeted, but being a publicly funded initiative it won't go bankrupt. | ||
KT_Elwood
674 Posts
On February 15 2025 03:36 oBlade wrote: You can take Musk away from NASA 100%. Fine. It's a conflict of interest. I agree 100%. Trump said "we would not let him do that segment or look in that area." If Trump reneges on that, or if Musk is stupid enough to approach NASA despite the glaring conflict, yet alone appearance of impropriety, they're assholes for that. Nonetheless Trump is not Musk and has a right to his own space policy. It is not Musk's fault that ULA's rockets are more expensive and worse, if that's what's going on. It's ULA's fault. You do not need to make the US taxpayer buy a more expensive thing just to keep up appearances. If you have to make dumb decisions to look impartial - that's another effect of conflict of interest. And why Carter gave up the damn peanut farm. | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9307 Posts
The US federal tax collection agency is reportedly preparing to give a team member of Elon Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge), which has already gutted several federal agencies and sparked multiple lawsuits, access to personal taxpayer data. The New York Times and the Washington Post both reported early on Monday that the Internal Revenue Service had received a request for access to a classified system that contains sensitive personal financial records. The request, which is reportedly under review, would give Doge officials “broad access to tax-agency systems, property and datasets, including tax returns”. One of these, the integrated data retrieval system (IDRS), gives tax agency employees the ability to see IRS accounts and bank information, the Washington Post reported. This is just terrifying tbh. Given Musk's habit of punishing people who disagree with or criticize him, I can only say I'm extremely glad not to live in the US right now. Anyone who thinks this will result in anything but lengthy investigations and prosecutions of Musk and Trump's enemies is delusional. | ||
Acrofales
Spain17815 Posts
| ||
Uldridge
Belgium4547 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22649 Posts
On February 18 2025 20:20 Uldridge wrote: Just arrest him? Why can't they do that? Democrats would have to go to the mat for it and they'd probably lose like they did with Trump. What would people think then? | ||
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9307 Posts
![]() Elon Musk just posted this. BTW that image is from a Batman movie. | ||
WombaT
Northern Ireland23678 Posts
Sigh. That free marketplace of ideas working again huh? So sick of this cunt, argh | ||
| ||