Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
Uncategorized
79
Posts
64
Posters
0
Views
-
@clintruin @mkoek @cstross here's one of my favourite Wikipedia pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autonomous_Tesla_vehicles_by_Elon_Musk
@kthy @clintruin @cstross but what does Grokipedia have to say on the subject? Not going to check, but I strongly suspect not much. 🙂
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross I'd be interested in finding out if Scott Manley got anything wrong here.
His take, as I understand it, is basically (1) the physics makes it complicated but not non-doable, and (2) can't be profitable now but may well be so within the foreseeable future -- making it likely that whoever gets there first, even before it's profitable, stands to make the usual absurd amounts of money (especially if orbital access is never properly regulated) once it does become cheap enough for it to be profitable.
-
@cstross Starlink might be the only thing one of his companies got right. I've been using one for a while now and it's a game changer when living somewhere remote. I wish we had a suitable EU competitor and not have to contribute to this man's lunacy...
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross Elon Musk wants datacenters in space because he read Neuromancer once in high school and didn't understand any of it.
-
@cstross yup. Tesla is dead, X is basically dead. He needs to create more hype, so here comes the physics breaking con to take more investors money.
@bellegraylane @cstross
Musk merged Xitter with xAI to justify its high valuation to investors as an AI company now.
The same crap with Tesla being rebranded an AI robotaxi and humanoid robot company.So makes sense to pull the same trick with SpaceX to gullible investors. That it's really an AI company so that SpaceX can afford to bail out Tesla when it buys all those unsold Cybertrucks.
Won't be surprised when Neuralink is touted as an AI company next
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross
I've been thinking about that. I ran across this today, and thought Musk might be able to work it in to his pitch: -
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross when his other shit starts to break up it's going to be a pretty busy game of billiards
-
@cstross won't Kessler Syndrome make space launch dead as a business long before that?
@fazalmajid No, because the density of particles in orbit falls off as the inverse cube of their altitude—the volume of space around Earth is vast, and the probability of an impact is a function of the particle density at any given altitude and how long your payload spends there on the way up. Starship could plausibly deliver comsat constellations to altitudes much higher than the overcrowded 200km orbits Starlink is crammed into, where impact probability is far lower.
-
@oldgeek @lucien @cstross
At 1:14:17 in the latest rant by @TechConnectify
https://youtu.be/KtQ9nt2ZeGM?t=1h14m17sImagine if government never built power lines to rural areas. They'd probably be singing praises to orbiting space lasers beaming them energy at huge expense or the delivery robot drones dropping off daily fuel shipments for their generators.
-
@cstross Starlink might be the only thing one of his companies got right. I've been using one for a while now and it's a game changer when living somewhere remote. I wish we had a suitable EU competitor and not have to contribute to this man's lunacy...
-
@cstross isn't Starship becoming less and less useful as they keep 'iterating' it's development?
That giant cargo capacity keeps on dropping.
@dgold Starship's first stage works fine (and has even re-flown), engines work fine (ditto). The problem is the upper stage design and the push for full reusability. If they throw away the stupid heat shield and make it a one-shot they could settle for a cheap disposable upper stage with monstrous payload capacity, and they could build it *right now*.
Once they had a 200 tonne payload HLV flying reliably, resuming incremental progress towards reusability would be uncontroversial.
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross anyone still falling for elon musk just really wants to fall for elon musk, or just wants *you* to fall for elon musk while they secretly sell, while they can get their money back, plus yours.
-
@gbargoud
The hell, I toolk this as a plot element in @bitterkarella 's latest gag?
Argh. I'm gonna hide under a rock...
@cstross @tony -
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross Elon keeps talking the dumbest shit every time he opens his mouth and everyone just starts throwing money at him without any thinking. Like, anyone remembers stupid Hyperloop? I kept saying that shit cannot ever work from day one and every time I was told he's the genius and I'm the idiot. Well, where's the fucking Hyperloop in every city?
-
-
@bellegraylane @cstross
Musk merged Xitter with xAI to justify its high valuation to investors as an AI company now.
The same crap with Tesla being rebranded an AI robotaxi and humanoid robot company.So makes sense to pull the same trick with SpaceX to gullible investors. That it's really an AI company so that SpaceX can afford to bail out Tesla when it buys all those unsold Cybertrucks.
Won't be surprised when Neuralink is touted as an AI company next
@bornach @bellegraylane @cstross just waiting for The Boring Company to pivot to AI…
-
@gbargoud
The hell, I toolk this as a plot element in @bitterkarella 's latest gag?
Argh. I'm gonna hide under a rock...
@cstross @tony@bitterkarella @cstross @tony @polypunk
This email exchange particularly but there are at least 2 others I've seen (one of which looked like he actually made it to the island)
-
@bitterkarella @cstross @tony @polypunk
This email exchange particularly but there are at least 2 others I've seen (one of which looked like he actually made it to the island)
-
@bitterkarella @cstross @tony @polypunk
This email exchange particularly but there are at least 2 others I've seen (one of which looked like he actually made it to the island)
@gbargoud @cstross @bitterkarella @tony @polypunk Wow. “Hey guys I wanna come party on pedo island!” “Nah man, you missed it, so sad”
As a nerd who’s gotten quite accustomed to living on the outer fringe of the Cool Kids Klub, this dialog feels hauntingly familiar.
Still gross, but also pathetic
-
@fazalmajid No, because the density of particles in orbit falls off as the inverse cube of their altitude—the volume of space around Earth is vast, and the probability of an impact is a function of the particle density at any given altitude and how long your payload spends there on the way up. Starship could plausibly deliver comsat constellations to altitudes much higher than the overcrowded 200km orbits Starlink is crammed into, where impact probability is far lower.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@BucciaBuccia ti sei mai domandato in base a cosa bannino gli account? Si fidano delle segnalazioni? Lol.
-
@prealpinux scusa la risposta tardiva; il video si vede.
-
RE: https://poliversity.it/@emama/115996714946368099
#torino Una questione di cornice: parlare di 50000 o parlare di 300? E perché non di 50000 e di 300?
@Nico_Piro@mastodon.uno https://nicopiro.substack.com/p/a-torino-la-folla-scompare
-
Che fai? Non metti anche la sigla?
-
> WhatsApp si WhatsApp no è solo una questione di cultura digitale
Sono completamente d'accordo con te
-
Come la #intelligenzaArtificiale influisce sulla formazione delle competenze. Studio svolto nell'ambito del programma #Anthropic Fellows
Lo studio analizza come l’IA influenzi l’apprendimento nel coding. Sebbene migliori la produttività immediata, l’uso passivo compromette la comprensione concettuale e le capacità di debugging. Risulta fondamentale un impegno cognitivo attivo per evitare l'erosione delle competenze tecniche.
-
Sono proprio curiosa di conoscere i risultati, sempre se si arriverĂ a capo di queste indagini.
Poi, WhatsApp si WhatsApp no è solo una questione di cultura digitale.
@informapirata
@informatica
-
Brescia: “un mondo fuori controllo. prospettive sul disordine globale”. il nuovo ciclo di incontri all’auditorium san barnaba
@anarchia
Prenderà il via martedì 3 febbraio il nuovo ciclo di incontri de “I Pomeriggi in San Barnaba“, la rassegna organizzata dalla Fondazione Clementina Calzari Trebeschi e dal Comune di
