Twitter

[AnalogPackrat]

Here's the logic, JR: if a (wealthy) person is capable of doing something thought to be "good" by the cult of redistribution, then they are obligated to do it for free. If they refuse they are now "bad" and must be shamed/banished/cancelled.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Here's the logic, JR: if a (wealthy) person is capable of doing something thought to be "good" by the cult of redistribution, then they are obligated to do it for free. If they refuse they are now "bad" and must be shamed/banished/cancelled.

There is another calculus involved with attacking the extremely wealthy besides simple envy, there are so few of them they are part of a tiny minority and easily outnumbered by mob sentiment. When they have FU money (like Elon) they are harder to cancel. His buying Twitter sounds like a cheesy B movie plot line.
==
I remain critical of Musk for capitalizing on government subsidies for almost every one of his businesses. That said he is still the smartest guy in the room and feasting from the government teat is not exactly stupid. It worked for him.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

There is another calculus involved with attacking the extremely wealthy besides simple envy, there are so few of them they are part of a tiny minority and easily outnumbered by mob sentiment.

True, but he was the hero of zero (emissions) only recently. Funny how that turned around.

When they have FU money (like Elon) they are harder to cancel. His buying Twitter sounds like a cheesy B movie plot line.

Too early to tell. He can hardly make it worse.

==
I remain critical of Musk for capitalizing on government subsidies for almost every one of his businesses.

SpaceX is orders of magnitude more efficient with public funding than NASA, so I cut him slack on that one. I'm less impressed with Tesla. I haven't kept up with his solar panel efforts. It would be good to have some manufacturing here instead of in China. Time will tell if it's another Solyndra.

That said he is still the smartest guy in the room and feasting from the government teat is not exactly stupid. It worked for him.

He's making things that people want/need unlike so many others who just drain funds away for naught.

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

SpaceX is orders of magnitude more efficient with public funding than NASA, so I cut him slack on that one. I'm less impressed with Tesla. I haven't kept up with his solar panel efforts. It would be good to have some manufacturing here instead of in China. Time will tell if it's another Solyndra.

I like his idea of solar shingles that use every roof for solar collection but it has many gotcha's making it impractical. I think he has some less than arms length dealing with the solar panel company (solar city) run by his brother/cousin. He has since rolled that company into Tesla and is working on a big picture plan to incorporate battery storage in homes with solar charging. Again smart but impractical without subsidies.

It's hard to keep track of the names, but the recent huge spending bill limits the EV auto tax credit to only EVs with batteries made in the US. Elon was building a new battery factory in Germany but after this legislation he instead moved the new factory to the US.

He's making things that people want/need unlike so many others who just drain funds away for naught.

If so many people wanted them they wouldn't need subsidies. I am in the market for a car and would take a two rotor Mach E if someone gave me one, but I would never spend $60k+ of my own money for transportation. Adjusted for inflation I did pay the equivalent of $50k in 1997 for my present car.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

It's hard to keep track of the names, but the recent huge spending bill limits the EV auto tax credit to only EVs with batteries made in the US. Elon was building a new battery factory in Germany but after this legislation he instead moved the new factory to the US.

Didn't they build a huge battery factory in NV?

If so many people wanted them they wouldn't need subsidies.

True. But plenty of my former (wealthy) neighbors in CA bought Tesla Powerwall setups (often paired with non-Tesla solar arrays). Doesn't come close to the utility of a 10-20kW genset and a 500gal LP tank, though. I lived in an area that was increasingly plagued by power outages (a minority were due to safety shutoffs or rolling blackouts), so probably half of the homes in my area had some kind of backup solution.

I am in the market for a car and would take a two rotor Mach E if someone gave me one, but I would never spend $60k+ of my own money for transportation. Adjusted for inflation I did pay the equivalent of $50k in 1997 for my present car.

I'm with you there. The current state of the technology doesn't meet my needs, nor is the price reasonable. I have friends in CA who went in for $90k+ on Tesla S sedans or $40-50k on model 3s. Also a few with shorter range things like the Leaf. Free charging at work plus solo use of diamond lane (2-3+ passenger commuter lanes) pushed many over.

IMO the whole refill like an ICE but with an electron hose is broken. Standardized battery modules that can be safely and quickly swapped automatically is the only way EVs make sense once you get to high density (i.e., long range) that competes with gas/diesel. That requires a lot of development and cooperation between manufacturers, but eliminates the charging time bottleneck. For heavy vehicles (trucks, busses, etc.) EV just doesn't make sense with current or near-future tech.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Oh, and I meant to add that I don't consider a government contract for launch services that was acquired competitively to be a "subsidy." SpaceX is, to me, his most impressive company and technology. NASA has, unfortunately, been fading the past 35 years or so. They've become a bureaucratic nightmare of waste to a large extent.

 

[boji]

They've become a bureaucratic nightmare of waste to a large extent.

Which would seem a likely result, being the MIC's public-relations face of progress.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Didn't they build a huge battery factory in NV?

the Nevada giga factory is old news (2014?) He recently abandoned a significant government subsidy from Germany to build his battery factory in Berlin, and moved the equipment to TX. Apparently the US government teat is sweeter than the German government teat.

True. But plenty of my former (wealthy) neighbors in CA bought Tesla Powerwall setups (often paired with non-Tesla solar arrays). Doesn't come close to the utility of a 10-20kW genset and a 500gal LP tank, though. I lived in an area that was increasingly plagued by power outages (a minority were due to safety shutoffs or rolling blackouts), so probably half of the homes in my area had some kind of backup solution.

yup, my brother's wife works for PG&E for now (expected to retire some time soon). He shares anecdotes about gross incompetence.

I'm with you there. The current state of the technology doesn't meet my needs, nor is the price reasonable. I have friends in CA who went in for $90k+ on Tesla S sedans or $40-50k on model 3s. Also a few with shorter range things like the Leaf. Free charging at work plus solo use of diamond lane (2-3+ passenger commuter lanes) pushed many over.

My brother an old IC motorhead keeps his wife in Tesla's for the diamond lane benefit. He's on at least his second one to keep the diamond lane working.

IMO the whole refill like an ICE but with an electron hose is broken. Standardized battery modules that can be safely and quickly swapped automatically is the only way EVs make sense once you get to high density (i.e., long range) that competes with gas/diesel. That requires a lot of development and cooperation between manufacturers, but eliminates the charging time bottleneck. For heavy vehicles (trucks, busses, etc.) EV just doesn't make sense with current or near-future tech.

I am repeating myself but I also like the idea of cars drawing power from the road surface... My brother (the smart one) explained to me why that won't work. Something about the power involved would require unsafe voltages. Tesla's namesake Nicola was working on wireless power transmission, is Detroit still suppressing that technology? The quick swap batteries make a lot of sense (I've seen prototype vehicles) but think of the infrastructure to accomplish that when they can't even build out chargers.

Oh, and I meant to add that I don't consider a government contract for launch services that was acquired competitively to be a "subsidy." SpaceX is, to me, his most impressive company and technology. NASA has, unfortunately, been fading the past 35 years or so. They've become a bureaucratic nightmare of waste to a large extent.

Don't confuse us with facts...

JR

 

[hodad]

Don't confuse us with facts...

Don't worry--he didn't confuse us with facts. I saw a lot of unsupported opinion in that little bit you quoted, but precious little in the way of facts.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Don't worry--he didn't confuse us with facts. I saw a lot of unsupported opinion in that little bit you quoted, but precious little in the way of facts.

Being old enough to remember Apollo missions, Voyager, and other past achievements gives the older crowd a different perspective. NASA really did some amazing things in the past. I don't see nearly as much of the can-do attitude coupled with engineering and science driven decision making in recent decades.

Challenger was the first indicator of the transition with clueless bureaucrats taking over. It hasn't improved. They still do some good missions, but the cost and time are often outrageous. Yes, I am aware that none of it is easy. Feel free to provide an actual argument rather than an unsupported contrary statement.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Being old enough to remember Apollo missions, Voyager, and other past achievements gives the older crowd a different perspective. NASA really did some amazing things in the past. I don't see nearly as much of the can-do attitude coupled with engineering and science driven decision making in recent decades.

A lot of the code for Apollo was written at MIT Instrumentation Lab... I knew a friend of a friend who worked on that. I worked in a different MITIL building on a different project.

Challenger was the first indicator of the transition with clueless bureaucrats taking over. It hasn't improved. They still do some good missions, but the cost and time are often outrageous. Yes, I am aware that none of it is easy. Feel free to provide an actual argument rather than an unsupported contrary statement.

The Challenger explosion was a very public embarrassment for NASA and an obvious disaster for all involved. I am not smart enough to second guess the engineering decisions, after the fact is always too easy (cold weather, leaky seals,etc). I suspect management changed not necessarily for the better after that very high profile fatal incident. Don't forget the Apollo 1 launchpad fire that killed three Astronauts. RIP for them too, but their deaths weren't televised live for the whole nation to watch.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

A lot of the code for Apollo was written at MIT Instrumentation Lab... I knew a friend of a friend who worked on that. I worked in a different MITIL building on a different project.

Back when engineering was still real.

The Challenger explosion was a very public embarrassment for NASA and an obvious disaster for all involved. I am not smart enough to second guess the engineering decisions, after the fact is always too easy (cold weather, leaky seals,etc). I suspect management changed not necessarily for the better after that very high profile fatal incident. Don't forget the Apollo 1 launchpad fire that killed three Astronauts. RIP for them too, but their deaths weren't televised live for the whole nation to watch.

My best friend in college knew immediately what had happened to Challenger when it failed. We were sophmores in 1986. His father was an engineer at Morton-Thiokol which was the main subcontractor for the SRBs.

They lived in Cocoa Beach and my friend had a summer job at the Cape working on the SRB refurb team. The boosters were recovered at sea, towed to the Cape, disassembled, inspected, cleaned, and reassembled for the next mission.

He and many others had seen first-hand the partial burn-throughs of the seals on prior missions. It was a known flaw and launch parameters were changed to accommodate while design changes were being made. Engineers begged to scrub the launch that cold morning. Bureaucrats over-rode them because they didn't want delays for the very high profile teacher in space mission.

I'll never forget that tragic day and my friend explaining what had happened with sketches of the SRB joint and seal design. Only three years earlier my father had taken me and my younger brother out of school to drive down to the Cape to see the first launch of Challenger.

The same kinds of degradation have happened at other places. Hewlett-Packard and Boeing immediately come to mind.

JR

 

[fazer]

The school teacher that was on the flight appeared there for the first non scientific reasons, (Publicity) her class watch the launch and the explosion. It was Surreal experience. (Like watching the planes fly into the towers.) It was the turning point for NASA.

 

[hodad]

Being old enough to remember Apollo missions, Voyager, and other past achievements gives the older crowd a different perspective. NASA really did some amazing things in the past. I don't see nearly as much of the can-do attitude coupled with engineering and science driven decision making in recent decades.

Challenger was the first indicator of the transition with clueless bureaucrats taking over. It hasn't improved. They still do some good missions, but the cost and time are often outrageous. Yes, I am aware that none of it is easy. Feel free to provide an actual argument rather than an unsupported contrary statement.

Hmm..... what has NASA done? Well, they've had some extremely successful Mars missions, which have overperformed pretty consistently. There's the Webb telescope (yes it went over budget, but it's still amazing.) Post-Challenger, the Space Shuttle did wonderful things like make the Hubble fully operational.

And for much of the last 30 years Republicans in Washington have fought to cut NASA's budget and screw with the organization in other ways as well. And despite that, NASA has had some remarkable successes.

By the way, if I wanted facts, or a well-supported argument, I certainly wouldn't seek out your posts.

 

[JohnRoberts]

As usual I keep learning about myself and fellow republicans.

NASA has pretty much received bipartisan support for decades while I can imagine Republicans being more conservative about budgets and to support private economy solutions, over depending on Russia for transportation to space. Musk and Bezos have both shown remarkable progress in privatized aerospace industry.

JR

PS: How about a little less personal attacks.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Hmm..... what has NASA done? Well, they've had some extremely successful Mars missions, which have overperformed pretty consistently. There's the Webb telescope (yes it went over budget, but it's still amazing.) Post-Challenger, the Space Shuttle did wonderful things like make the Hubble fully operational.

Hubble was not functional when launched. I also worked with a guy who was on the WFPC2 design team. Hubble was way over budget, but did eventually produce some good science.

I never said NASA did nothing. I said it was usually way over budget and late. STS never lived up to it's goal of providing a cheap and reusable launch platform. It had a good payload capacity and flexibility, but it was very expensive. SLS, which is reusing SRB and main engines from STS is late and way over budget. Or haven't you noticed?

And for much of the last 30 years Republicans in Washington have fought to cut NASA's budget and screw with the organization in other ways as well. And despite that, NASA has had some remarkable successes.

When an agency is wasteful is the solution to just give them more funding? Typical "logic" from the left. The problems at NASA are organizational and managerial in nature. More money doesn't fix that.

By the way, if I wanted facts, or a well-supported argument, I certainly wouldn't seek out your posts.

And you've provided nothing in the way of facts to support your opinions.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Here's your sanity check for JWST:

https://usafacts.org/articles/how-much-did-nasas-james-webb-space-telescope-cost/
"The Webb telescope was initially given a $1 billion total budget with a projected launch date of 2010. It surpassed $1.2 billion in total spending by 2007, three years after development began.

According to NASA budget documents, the project has cost about $10 billion through the 2021 fiscal year. Most of its funding was spent on the development of the telescope including initial modeling of the project, construction of each of its components, and testing before its launch."

 

[boji]

Everything but the kitchen sink (app), here we come.

 

[hodad]

As usual I keep learning about myself and fellow republicans.

I'm here to inform.

Republican Budget Cuts Threaten NASA's Space Exploration Plans

 

[AnalogPackrat]

https://capitalresearch.org/article/dismantling-nasa-an-obama-legacy/