Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | WalterBright's commentslogin

> when executed in a non-profit form

For-profits are of no benefit to society? Are SpaceX rockets a loser for society?


> Are SpaceX rockets a loser for society?

That remains to be seen. By giving Musk the prominence to set up DOGE and destroy USAID, they've indirectly led to the deaths of almost a million people.

By launching starlink, they're also increasing the amount of aluminum in the upper atmosphere, which may have catastrophic effects on the ozone layer.


Do government non-profit spacecraft not use aluminum?

SpaceX rockets also are re-usable, which is environmentally better. They also cost about 10% of what non-profit rockets cost to launch.

> they've indirectly led to the deaths of almost a million people.

DOGE is a non-profit entity. Besides, why can't other non-profit governments pick up the aid?


Specific innovations tend to be protected via IP when they are developed privately and, as a result, “butterfly effect” developments in a completely different field from cross-pollination are less likely to occur later down the line.

Patents expire. Also, engineers are pretty good about working around patents. Look at all the various AI implementations, for example.

P.S. I oppose patents.


Before the Apollo launch, von Braun was asked what the reliability of the rocket was. He asked 6 of his lieutenants if it was ready to fly. Each replied "nein". Von Braun reported that it had six nines of reliability.

I'm assuming this is fake but it's hilarious.

GitHub taking notes

Is that a real fact?

(I misremembered it slightly, so sue me)

From "Apollo The Race to the Moon" pg 102:

The joke that made the rounds of NASA was that the Saturn V had a reliability rating of .9999. In the story, a group from headquarters goes down to Marshall and asks Wernher von Braun how reliable the Saturn is going to be. Von Braun turns to four of his lieutenants and asks, "Is there any reason why it won't work?" to which they answer: "Nein." "Nein." "Nein." "Nein." Von Braun then says to the men from headquarters, "Gentlemen, I have a reliability of four nines."


You know why you chose 6 9s.

Reliability of 4 neins to be precise

The date checks

After the moon landing, Armstrong allowed that he had estimated the survivability at 50%.

Amateurs who try to build their own explosives usually either fail to explode or explode killing the builder.

An older friend of mine at Boeing told me how when he was a teen, he had a teen friend who built a pipe bomb. They drove off to a field to set it off. It didn't explode, so his friend went to investigate. Then it went off, and my friend had the pleasure of driving his gutted friend to the hospital to die.


There's a selection process at work where smart people who know what they're doing don't try to assemble bombs in their garage for fun. If there's a legitimate reason like your country is fighting an existential war the kinds of people who can do things start doing things.

But it's just rare having a person smart enough to be able to do it be stupid enough to try. (and the people who do are nutjob terrorists like Timothy McVeigh)


It proved nearly impossible to sink the Bismarck and Yamato battleships in WW2 just by shelling them.

Both were rendered useless hulks long before they went under, though.

Considering how the sunk ships at Pearl Harbor were refloated, refitted, and put back into service suggests otherwise.

That's great if you're in a shallow anchorage (average depth: 45 feet). Less so if you sink in the Arabian sea and you're under fire during the refloating process.

I also suspect modern ships are a little more sensitive to complete immersion.

Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helge_Ingstad_collision

> In May 2019, the Minister of Defense was presented with a report from Defense Material which concluded that a possible repair would cost 12–14 billion and take more than five years. The cost of purchasing a new corresponding vessel was estimated at NOK 11–13 billion, with a completion time of just over five years.

And it didn't even go all the way under.


Laser cannons should be a cheap way to shoot them down.

The best strategy is to save up at least 6 months of runway.

This is the real underlying story, and it may be unfair to expect people to "do this on their own" but in the USA, you really need to do this on your own.

The problem with advance warning is the employee who decides to sabotage in revenge.

For example, a company I knew in the 80s had a wholly owned subsidiary. It was losing money, so it was decided to close the subsidiary. Management decided that they'd be nice guys, and notified the subsidiary that it would be closed in 90 days and then everyone would be laid off.

90 days later, management arrived to close the facility. It was empty, stripped clean of everything. Not a lick of work was done in the 90 days, and nobody was there. There were reports that trucks had come to the loading dock, and took everything they could carry.

The cost of that led to the collapse of the company.


I find it hard to blame the workers in this story... it's a poor indictment of the management if they only checked in 3 months later and got this surprise - no wonder the company collapsed!

The workers who left the company while still collecting a paycheck for 90 days are essentially stealing, and the ones who stripped the premises were also thieves.

I agree it was poor management to not oversee what was happening.

This is why management does not give advance notice of layoffs. Usually, when a person gets laid off, their first notion of it is a security guard is there to help them fill a box with their personal items and escort them out.

Nobody likes this, but it's the inevitable result of a bad apple now and then. For example, most people aren't thieves, but banks still need security guards because there are thieves.


The company is free to pay the salary and tell the employee not to show up during that time.

Which is so common it's called "garden leave".

> Laying people off is a result of mismanagement and not because they can't afford to keep them.

Markets are a chaotic system and the needs of a business must constantly adapt - or they go out of business.



in other words: "won't somebody think of the economy!"

Profit maximization makes for the high standard of living we enjoy.

The one where one trip to ER can leave you on the street and students have six digit debts?

Ironically, you picked two systems that are heavily interfered with by the government.

Back in the Great Depression, my great grandmother got sick and was hospitalized, and they took care of her until she passed. My grandfather did not have enough to pay the bill. The hospital told him not to worry, just pay what he could. It took him a while, but he paid the bill in full.


Heavily interfered how? Canada / UK / Australia have healthcare which is "heavily interfered" as you call it, and they're better off for it

Whoa now.

Consider that getting the government out of healthcare would mean all the rural hospitals close.

Consider who that would most-hurt, while saving you money, before you jump to the humanitarian position. Consider it in light of the 2024 election.


How? The government runs it, and/or heavily regulates it, and shifts costs.

> and they're better off for it

In the US, the cost of medical care rose in step with inflation until 1968. After that, it rose at a much steeper rate, and has not slowed down. 1968 was when the government got involved with health care.

Countries with a heavily-interfered health care system are poorer as a result.


Was the hospital affiliated with a religious order?


> Back in Great Depression

Why not civil war?

> It took him a while, but he paid the bill in full.

How long was “a while” specifically? And how much did it affect your grandfathers life?


> Why not civil war?

My great grandmother's brother, Frank Taylor, fought in the Union Army. He later became a bodyguard for Buffalo Bill. And that's all I know about him, and the personal side of the Civil War.

Keep in mind that doctoring was pretty primitive in those days. A doctor could set your broken bones and sew up wounds, and that's about it. You got better or you died. Doctors were called "sawbones" in those days.

> How long was “a while” specifically?

If I recall correctly, it took him 3 years. I don't know much about his finances.

I do know that his first job was shoveling coal in a steamship, which is a filthy, rotten job.

https://walterbright.com/trip/chas.html


ah yes, the high standard of living inlcuding checks notes world-leading medical bankruptcies, collapsing life expectancy despite insane healthcare spending, crippling student debt, unaffordable housing that requires a trust fund just to rent, and wages that stagnated decades ago while corporate profits and CEO pay skyrocketed.

i spent $57 on a regular size pack of paper towels and toilet paper in the bay area yesterday

truly, the invisible hand is giving us the finger


Interestingly, you mentioned the trifecta of industries most interfered with by the government - healthcare, education, and housing.

The government puts its foot on the scale there.

In contrast, look at the software industry. No regulations, yet highly sophisticated software where the price went to zero. I just reinstalled Ubuntu on my (now fixed!) computer, and every bit of the software was 100% free. And I give away the software I write for it!

$zero!! Can you believe it?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: