>Theres fuck all out there
The worlds first jewillionaires will be asteroid miners

>there's nothing out there in the ocean why bother sailing from our home shores
stay at home and cope

>rockets are cool and all but have you tried having sex?
only virgins say this shit, once you've had sex a few times you realize it's pretty boring and all you really wanted was the confidence boost. rockets are much more worth your time
>Weened on science fiction
ESL opinion disregarded

>>16430548
That's why I said it was a joke. I got the obvious joke outta of the way before I delved into deeper concerns.
No, rockets are not worth your time. It's literally just programming, they told you the moon landing was a big deal and you being an npc with an empty life want to see something similar to it in your life time.

The quote from Picasso is very profound, I was literally shaking when I understood the full signficance of it.

File: chess king clothing store ad.jpg (418 KB, 770x1024)

418 KB JPG

>>16430541
Must be really sad to troll for teeny tiny dopamine hits. What went wrong with your life that this is the source of "joy" for you? No matter how much you troll, each day gets darker and life less enjoyable. Those tiny hits of dopamine from having incited a reaction in someone, somewhere, get a bit less effective each time you have one. You know it's empty, that each day is less than the previous day, but you don't know how to stop. You can't find enjoyment in anything else. This is all you have left and it is slowly slipping away from you. Soon you will post all day long and find no joy in it whatsoever. The dopamine will stop but you'll keep doing it because you have no idea what else to do with your empty life. While others are out living their lives, you sit on the sidelines, seething that they have something. You know you can never be them. You can never accomplish anything. You can never find your own joy. So you try one last ditch effort to at least pull them down with you. And you fail. The world keeps on spinning, not caring about your misery. There's nothing you can do now to get back to normal. There's nothing you can do to find happiness. It's just over for you and no one misses you when you finally disappear forever.

>>16430541
>>16430558
Both of these posts are embarrassing and gay, never waste more than 3 sentences on a 4chan post

>>16430558
*Yawn* no substance, you basically just called me a miserable troll, seeking dopmaine hits in too long a way.
Admidttedly, my tone was kinda trollish. But I believe everything I said in the OP. I do find happiness in more meaningful stuff, like the 80s aesthetics you just posted I think are really cool, reminds of me of this ad:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UJwf__D0-M

I thought this was pretty cool. Just because I don't like the Elon, Scott Manley, wierd nerdy baby yoda cult for men doesn't mean I am completely soulless.

Quite the opposite.

File: C425E843-F9DC-4734-9EF2-F(...).jpg (383 KB, 1600x899)

383 KB JPG

>>16430541
Because this is the same landing technology that will give us Thunderbird 2 for real.

>>16430541
so true oomfie, i'm like you and find much more meaning in doomscrolling 24/7 and being bitter about how garbage my life is.

>>16430548
>all you really wanted was the confidence boost
Try having sex with someone you love and who loves you back. It's about that, retard.

But yes OP catching the booster is stupid, it means nothing for space exploration thus even space nerds are stupid for clapping. It changes nothing. Starship upper stage, the important part, is a failure. Burned up in the atmosphere and exploded in the ocean. A scrap heap on the ocean floor. The part the humans ride in exploded, who cares if the replaceable booster was salvaged? Mind you it was burning freely after capture, Elon forgot to install fire suppression on the tower like the retard he is.

File: ElonHusk.jpg (83 KB, 679x368)

83 KB JPG

>>16430558
Worthless egotistical posts like this make me wonder if Elon actually does lurk here. This is some overly wordy response you'd expect from Elon or maybe one of his head cultists.

cringe, KYS

>>16430562
Correct, the only time I reply is to posts like yours. Most people cant read past 3 words these days let alone 3 sentence. OP text should have read "Rockets gay lol"

>>16430541
>wow people care about humanity trying to do technological advances, what a bunch of faggots with no life
very edgy anon
>You realize there's fuckall out there in space?
you cant prove that

First order of business, we've got to get a funko pop to mars. We need microplastics on Mars. This is essential.

>>16430541
>I mean rockets are cool and all but have you tried having sex
Do you know where you are?
>Still stuck on the narrative of space exploration from the mid 20th century
I can't think of anything that's more mid 20th century than Pablo Picasso. Space exploration clearly continued from the mid 20th century into the 21st, but the cubism movement is definitively mid 20th century.

I love space exploration, I love the stories of Apollo mission and the cold war era of cosmonauts and astronauts, the technical challenges and so forth.

That being said, the fact that Elon is the face behind this shit now drains my whole desire to applaud. We know it's just him using public money for his own narcissistic PR.

The James Webb Telescope, that's what excites me now.

>>16430801
Can you make a video essay about this so I can appreciate your expression of the culture of your people, white man?

>>16430819
Peckerwood life that's what it's about

File: wym-wdym.gif (597 KB, 165x206)

597 KB GIF

>>16430541
> because you don't have the capacity to step out of narratives and assess truth.
> Weened on science fiction, hyperreality, your existenece is a pathetic sad one.
What do you mean?

holy kek this redditor is melting down

>>16430541
if you dont like rockets or the engineering behind it all then, amazingly, you probably wont appreciate this either. personally i find it exciting to see and learn about what it takes to have a 25-30 story tower fly 46 miles up and at least that down range, turn around, and then land itself on the exact spot it launched from.

And of course, the whole idea of space flight, reaching the moon and mars etc, and everything that demands is also interesting and exciting. ive been on long earth based expeditions and know what various environments require of you; i've flown and landed aircraft; it all gives me a great deal of respect for what this much much harder kind of thing takes.

so, if you dont really like big limit-pushing engineering or have a mind for planning risky adventures, then i can see why this kind of thing isn't really very meaningful to you.

Id be interested to learn what the haters itt do find interesting, and what they have done in their lives.

>>16430878
> because you don't have the capacity to step out of narratives and assess truth.
Here is a story about Bob.
Bob believed in narratives, and he couldn't step out of them.
The end.

Isn't that story in itself a narrative?
He has no idea what he's talking about.

>>16430885
youre responding to a mentally ill idiot arguing emotionally out of bad faith

is this the thundertranny cope thread?

>>16430878
Pretty self explanatroy.

You're who woldview and things you find exciting are a prodcut of you being weaned on low quality genre fiction.
You watched Star Trek or Star Wars as a kid and you were impressed with the spaceships and have been unable to let go ever since.

That's what I meant by ''weaned on science fiction".

As for narratives. Ever since we are young we are bombarded with easy to digest narratives, a real sign of spirtual and intellectual growth is not falling for these narratives.
"You're not immune to propoganda" Musk uses these narratives explicity to sell the space fantasies. "Mankind pushing forward", "Mankind needs for a second home" any sentence with "Mankind" in it is most likely selling a narrative.
A narrative is bullshit that Kutzsgestat sells, a narrative is bullshit that that Hariri guy sells.

If you were excited for a space out of respect for engineerring and mild curiousity while being intelligent enough not to fall for "narratives" lie this guy>>16430885
That would be way more respectable.

>>16430900
im sure you are right but its a subject i like discussing so they will bait me in nearly every time.

>>16430921
>"Mankind pushing forward", "Mankind needs for a second home" any sentence with "Mankind" in it is most likely selling a narrative.
well, its not a bad idea to aim for. its not likely to happen any time soon so far as i can see, but a Mcmurdo type research base on mars, or several, is absolutely possible even with what we can do at the moment. who knows what will be possible using the lessons learned doing that for a while?

>>16430904
Yup

>>16430885
Art, fine wine, literature, the real fruits of human civilisation. There is nothing for a man of culture in space.

>>16430927
It's a horrible idea to aim for, it's not some romantic unspoiled nature, it's a sterile rock where everything wants to kill you. There's nothing up there to bring back, and there's nothing to do once you're there other than slowly lose bone mass and breath in carcinogenic space dust.

>>16430921
It seems like you're too obsessed with narratives.
I guess I don't care about narratives that much.
I just like the news that tell me that the world became less shitty, and I don't like the news that tell me that the world became shittier.
That's all.

>>16430947
What's good art I should experience instead of getting excited for spacex?
>>16430959
And why do you belive catching a booster makes the world a better place?

>>16430541
>put me in the mindset of someone who enjoys this
Someone who wants to see the stars but understands the enormous cost and resource requirement to even leave the gravity of our own planet. Such launches like this are one more step closer to realizing that goal, it likely won't be space x that does it, but people who build ontop of each others work to get there. Likely not in our lifetime.
>tried sex
Ahhh wooo i get to cum inside a girl and pretend to care about her for 30 minutes after because i require the after sex text so i can't get a bogus rape charge. Id rather spend time with a girl who I can discuss things like space travel with.

>you realize there is fuckall in space.
There is a lot in space, everything that is not of earth is in space. We can learn more about how fuckall happened on mars for billions of years, maybe we learn that that life similar to ours lives deep below the surface. That our understanding of how life evolves ourside our ecosystem is completly changed. Going to space furthers our understanding of not just space but also ourselves and our home.

>it means nothing to me.
Pablo Picasso was a dead beat dad who cared for nothing but art. It is no suprise he does not understand such feats being he is no man of science as the great artists before him.

>>16430983
I could try to explain to you some of the advantages of catching a booster, but that doesn't matter.
I was more interested in what's a big deal with narratives.

>>16430947
starship and space exploration is a art, and the subject of many literatures.

>>16430953
you're just being boring now. a weenie

rocket trannies are so easy to bait for a reaction, it's how you know they're all redditors who formed an illegitimate clique on 4chan

>>16430996
Well, like the other anon said. I don't really know what I'm talking about.
I think there's some truth to "buying narratives" but it was probably said better by a great thinker, I think I was going for something like "Manufacturing of consent" but instead it's the manufacturing of excitment and shallow hobbies.

I mean, I guess just let people have their "fun" but I still think they need to admit, it's not something important, it's not about any of the bullshit of "advancing mankind" "saving mankind".
Just say that you like rockets because they are cool, that's an answer I would've benn satisified with.

But the best answer in my opinion is what this guy gave>>16430947

>>16431011
I don't mean genre fiction, please have some standards...

>>16430983
Go to Florence, see Botticelli's Primavera. Then you might start to understand.

>>16431026
The real redpill is that space is lame but sci-fi is cool.

>>16431020
You seem like a midwit who is arguing about a topic you know nothing about just for the purpose of making people not happy because you are depressed as fuck.
Are you paki, Bengal, indian, Chinese or Russian by chance?

>>16431035
>Has no arguments
>Resorts to primitive bigotry

Your average marslet lady's and gentlemen...

>>16430543
The problem with mining asteroids is that they might be full of resources, but flooding the market with said resource tanks their value in the process. You would have to slowly release your product over decades to keep it worth anything and no one has time for that shit.

>>16431035
>>16431035
true, I am despressed as fuck. But wrong, I don't want to make people not happy.

But is your love for space and rockets so shallow that just questioning the narrative a little makes you unhappy?

>>16431035
Most painters are overrated. People get excited about Picasso, Van Gogh, Pollock, Basquiat, in large part because of mimetic desire. There are some classics like Guernica, though much of the later paintings are the same idea of distorted angular forms. His early period works are even less memorable.

Needless to say, steam power and antibiotics are far more important than cubism and abstract expressionism. Most people wouldn't be here without those technologies, the same can't be said for modern art.

I also wonder if Picasso was still bitter about the Nazis, and in a fit of ressentiment rejected the moon landing and space program for its association with Werner von Braun.

>>16431105
>Most people wouldn't be here without those technologies

And this is supposed to endear me to them? If all you care about is bare life then I don't think we can see eye to eye.

>>16431110
Exactly what I was gonna say. It would be actully better for most poeple if they were not here. Most people are living meaningless lives, rotting in front of TikTok and obssessing over Star Wars.
Art is what makes life worth living, if technology is gonna save us but not enrich us culturally and spiritually we're better off dead.

>>16431065
Lift weights and touch grass. It'll help with your depression.

Not that guy, but I don't even understand why you'd be upset about SpaceX achieving yet another milestone. Consider the possibility that you are fueled by resentment, and are succumbing to a crabs in a bucket mentality.

>>16431110
Are you an anti-natalist? Overwhelming odds you wouldn't be here without those technologies. If you are not grateful to be alive, then unironically kill yourself.

>>16431127
No but I don't think life in and of itself is an end, read some agamben.

>>16431125
Don't take this rapidly ageing millenial advice.

>>16430541
>Hey Ug! You hear about Grug? Him walk to edge of valley! Him say very nice!
>Who care? Nothing important am outside valley! Should fix all problem in here before go out there!

>>16431138
This is completely wrong. There are things in the valley, new fruits, other humans, interesting plants, useful and delightful things

Weve all seen pictures of mars and all there is are rocks. Space is a dead sterile void occasionally interrupted by inhospitable dust. That isn't even slightly similar to the exploration of earth.

>>16431119
Tiktok is effectively a platform for sharing cultural creations. Star wars is literally art. They're not prestigious, nor are they necessarily high quality, but they're still art. Very ironic that you posture yourself as spiritually enlightened, yet are hostile to human life and complain when the normies consume lowbrow art.

>>16431155
If you boil a belt long enough you can eat it, so what? We want to have standards.

>>16431133
>read some agamben

Why would I take advice from you, a self described depressive and a clearly resentful failure.

>>16431144
>There's nothing in space.
There's literally everything in space.

More resources, more energy, more territory that can be made habitable.

>>16431166
You can't even distinguish between two obviously different posting styles... Maybe stick to the cat in the hat or something.

>>16431169
Ok now we are getting somewhere. But i do not believe it will ever be economically justifiable to make other planets habitable.

>>16431028
naturally its more interesting when you can actually go somewhere and all you have to do is say 'the alcubiere drive placed us with 10AUs of the distress beacon' etc

>>16431065
>true, I am despressed as fuck.
i mean it does show fren. exploration and push boundaries needs some hope for the future etc. its ok. hopefully it'll pass.

>>16430541
I would really like to care about this stuff but I don't really feel much from it.

Saying that, they're major scientific achievments. It's like crowds cheering during the development of airplanes. It took a lot of people, may or may not have actually worked, and now you push humanity forwards just a little bit, and you got the watch it.

>MUH NARRIATIVES, ASSESS TRUTH
Pseud babble.

>>16431404
>they're major scientific achievments
Are they really? or are you buying into a narrative?

>>16431425
easily reusable orbiters have been something people have wanted and tried for since before the saturnV was built. They had designs in early testing since almost before Project Gemini was started. Theres a reason for this.

>>16431404
Cheering is just lame no matter whats happening.

>>16430543
Not necessarily the asteroid miners. Nordstrom, for example, got into business supplying the gold miners. Same with Levi, Wells Fargo, etc. Others, like the founding families of Seattle (Denny, Maynard, Yesler, Horton) owned much of the land so they also got rich from Seattle becoming a boom town.
So while some people got rich from actually getting the gold (like Weyerhaeuser), many also got rich in secondary or tertiary services for the miners.
If SpaceX was more monopolistic, they'd demand a % of all future profits of uplifted mass. So if a company launched their asteroid mining rig on SpaceX, they'd essentially pay a tax to SpaceX in perpetuity. I don't think SpaceX would do this because they're already going to be toeing the line of getting broken up for being too successful, and certain agencies are already trying to make SpaceX fail (like the FAA, EPA, California's Coastal Commission, etc.) I think SpaceX is going to start bankrolling near competitors soon, similar to what Microsoft did for Apple back in 1997. I expect zero dollars to Blue Origin or ULA (who will probably disappear/get absorbed within 5 years), but I would expect Stoke, Relativity, etc. to get funds. They can be complimentary to SpaceX.

>>16431053
A change in abundance means things might get utilized more. Currently roughly 6000x as much copper is made as gold per year. If we had a lot of asteroid-gathered gold, for example, it would replace copper in some electrical/electronic applications. It would also be used a lot more in: jewelry (Indians have an insatiable appetite for wearing gold, so I'd expect joint/back pain rates to skyrocket in the subcontinent),
medical uses like dental work, joint replacements, etc),
construction for decoration and functionality (gold plumbing instead of lead/plastic/steel),
gold catallytic converters, etc.

>>16431437
winning a battle is worth cheering for. watching something exceptional is too. maybe you're just a bit young and shy and feel easily embarrassed.
>its like so totally not cool when my parents cheers about stuff you know...
etc

>>16431451
its just hard to see how mining gold on an asteroid and getting it back here could be cheaper than just opening more mines. theres fucking loads still out there.

bump

>>16430921
A man of culture is a faggot. Human life and experience has no value. The only slightly interesting thing about the experience of existence is breaking reality in efforts to manifest human will.

>>16430541
>I mean rockets are cool and all but have you tried having sex?
Elon has 12 kids and stil cares and cheers for rockets THOUGH.

>>16431454
>winning a battle
Yeah I guess if I was wearing plate armour and I'd just won a battle with my knights I'd give up a rousing hip hip hooray

What are you talking about

>>16431548
The Nietzsche dipshit here to tell you whats cool

>>16430541
Picasso was a retard

>>16431575
i was thinking of the opening battle scene in Galdiator

File: GTQnG6XWwAA7mot.png (82 KB, 680x344)

82 KB PNG

>>16430541
Why do anything at all, huh.

>>16431431
There's a reason that only spacex started doing this. It's for marketing.
The technology isn't particularly innovative. The reason it wasn't done in the past is due to (ironically) cost. The extra fuel required to land the rocket is astronomical, to the point where it defeats the purpose.
If your purpose is some big marketing play so you can get more government contracts, it works well

>>16431608
You really are a pseud, what makes you think that the cost of fuel is more then an entire rocket.

>>16430541
It's just good old human delusions of grandeur. Anyone with sense knows that space colonization is physically impossible, but that's not so common

>>16430541
Science is not about if or should but rather it is about if we can.

if something can be done then it must be done atleast once

File: Newyork-movie-edward-hopp(...).jpg (135 KB, 900x725)

135 KB JPG

>>16431600
Art enriches the soul, art is worth making and experiencing. Technology and science are means to an end, the end is to make society comfotable so that people can focus on art.

>>16431608
it seems to be quite effective marketing then, in that they launch more than anyone else year on year, and so it cheaper too.

How much fuel does it use to boost back and land a falcon9 or heavy btw?

>government contracts.
make up an increasingly small amount of spacex yearly earnings. starlink made $4bn last year.....government contracts total since 2003? $15bn.

>>16431600
Cool onions right meme

>>16431616
If you are paying to lift fuel into space, you need to do it more times. So it actually double or triples the number of times you need to launch.
Not to mention all the added cost of refurbishing the rockets, ground infrastructure, etc.

>>16431635
would be great if you tried putting some numbers to these factors.

>>16431650
Why should I? Where are your numbers? This is actually the first time you have thought about this?
I will say it again - landing a rocket is not a technological feat. It's something we've known how to do for a long time. Doing it bigger is impressive, but it's just a bigger version of older technology.
So I ask you - why didn't NASA try this 50 years ago? It's not because they didn't have the technology. They considered it economically infeasible.
Take a look at the spacex plan to go to the moon, it's a total joke.

>>16431661
>Why should I?
you seem to be making a big deal out this thing you thought up. A reasonable person would check it out to see if it's a decent criticism before preparing to die on the hill.

>>16431630
SpaceX Artemis contact was $2.9 billion. Who cares if SpaceX is now making money from starlink. Marketing is needed to convince the public to spend such huge amounts of money

>>16431661
>It's not because they didn't have the technology.
theres no chance they were technically able to automatically land half the saturnV backwards into tower mounted catch arms. the guidance and location tracking simply wasn't up to that. You should check out the lunar landscape model which the AGC was able to store for the LM auto landing program if you think otherwise.

>>16431671
im not sure what your point really is. yes, some government contracts came along at the right time and helped keep the company going in its development program. but clearly they are doing quite well now.

>>16431667
Hey retard, rocket lift capabilities are the entire point of rockets, and my complaint is not my own invention, but a very pervasive criticism of spacex's methods.
And then people like you come around and have clearly never thought about things at all.
If you are saying this is a good idea, then you are just as responsible for providing the numbers as I am. But clearly this concept that it requires fuel to land rockets has never even crossed your mind.

>>16431678
ive thought about it and looked into it, likely more than you have at this point. how much fuel is needed for boost back and landing a falcon 9 reusable booster? starship super heavy? how much does it weigh? whats the payload cost V saving on reusing the booster?

its simple stuff and will soon wrap this little contention up.

>>16431675
That marketing is needed to convince the public to spend huge amounts of money on spaceX. The money is being spent whether or not spacex is making money by other means.

>>16431681
Sorry but if you had actually looked into it, you would not have thought I had made it up. You would realize that this is the entire question that the feasibility of such rockets contends with. This is the main criticism of the reusable rockets. I can only assume you live in an echo chamber

>>16431688
like the launching a Tesla in a long orbit around the sun? that was good marketing. Seems to have done the trick too since the company is launching more than everyone else ever has almost every year, and charging less per KG to do it.
>the public to spend
you mean other companies that want to launch their stuff, or do you mean the government giving them tax money? Government has given spacex $15bn since 2003 for various contracts. starlink made $4bn last year alone. its some money from the government but not really that much in the scheme of things

>>16431456
>>16431451

Space Shuttle: $54,000/kg
Falcon 9: $2,720/kg
Starship: $20-100/kg
Air cargo $4-8/kg
Starship is going to make stuff SO cheap to ship to space. Lots and lots of nonviable businesses are going to happen. Instead of purely mining the asteroids for minerals to return to Earth, you'd probably use them in space. You would probably essentially turn them into very large spaceships, and a nice side product would be tradeable/sellable minerals (platinum-group metals).
For example, the near earth asteroids such as Ryugu, Bennu, and Nereus have lots of carbon and silica. You would want to land a factory ship on the asteroid. Bag the asteroid up (these asteroids are kind of porous like gravel piles, and with just 20cm/s escape velocity you don't want your mass to float away while you're doing operations). The factory ship mines and refines the minerals into useful things like solar panels, fuel, oxidizer, solar sails, armor, structural members, valuable minerals for trade/sale etc. Useless stuff can be jettisoned by mass driver at high speed, which means the ship gradually can be brought somewhere useful, much faster than solely using solar sails.

>>16431714
Jesus you're retarded. What is YOUR point?
Again: the public needs to be convinced to spend billions of dollars on spaceX, for example the Artemis mission

File: Asteroids.png (14 KB, 827x177)

14 KB PNG

>>16431719
These large asteroid-constructed ships could be used as Aldrin cyclers. The asteroids would allow spin gravity cyclers with room for many starships to dock. When near Earth, Starships would dock with the cycler and passengers would spend the duration of the trip inside the spacious, safe cycler. At the end of their journey they would depart via starship for re-entry/landing.

Asteroid-built ships are probably going to be the first interstellar generation ships. With such large mass already out of a gravity well it's obviously the best way for extremely large ships to be built. Lots of parts would still come from Earth (computers, nuclear fuel, etc.), but even with Starship getting 150 tonnes/trip, it would take 488,600 trips to get the mass of Bennu, 3,000,000 trips for the mass of Ryugu, or 4,666,636 trips for Nereus.

>>16431688
like the launching a Tesla in a long orbit around the sun? that was good marketing. Seems to have done the trick too since the company is launching more than everyone else ever has almost every year, and charging less per KG to do it.
>the public to spend
you mean other companies that want to launch their stuff, or do you mean the government giving them tax money? Government has given spacex $15bn since 2003 for various contracts. starlink made $4bn last year alone. its some money from the government but not really that much in the scheme of things

>>16430611
that's oomf!

>>16430541
You know most companies just pay shareholders and don't leverage capital to do cool stuff like this? They just silently bleed away money in service of nothing. What is your complaint exactly? You just saw something and got mad? My dog does that

>>16431723
>Again: the public needs to be convinced to spend billions of dollars on spaceX

They already do, retard. Starlink is getting billions every year.

>>16431731
Aren't starlinks main customers also governments?

>>16431708
>would not have thought I had made it up.
if you'd read about it and the associated figures you'd be giving them, instead of not giving them and just restating your opinion. perhaps you just read other people stating their opinion, also with no actual figures.

>This is the main criticism of the reusable rockets.
great, feel free to get some numbers into your criticism. you did bring it up and have been rather strident about it after all.

>>16431719
yeah, looks good.

>>16431723
>the public needs to be convinced to spend billions of dollars on spaceX, for example the Artemis mission
by 'public' are you meaning the government, and that they need the publicity to have support for what they are contracting out to spacex? But that isn't their main income stream. $15bn over 20 years isn't that much. im really not sure what you're getting at with this whole 'publicity thing'.

>>16431739
>You know most companies just pay shareholders and don't leverage capital to do cool stuff like this?

Well, it's literally illegal to do that if you are publicly traded. You can thank (((Dodge brothers))) v Ford for that.

>>16431744
i dont think so.

>>16431681
>how much fuel is needed for boost back and landing a falcon 9 reusable booster? starship super heavy? how much does it weigh? whats the payload cost V saving on reusing the booster?

Wow it's like I'm really reading a comment from 2014. Incredible.

>>16431744
not sure. by 'governments' would you be meaning other than the US government? starlink is getting huge for residential customers. i think thats been their main reason for the soaring revenue from it.

>>16431719
Mass to orbit does not mean that operating in space is any easier, and it certainly doesn't mean getting to the asteroids is trivial enough where something as cheap as raw materials are worth retrieving. Yes, even for in space applications.

>>16431635
Increasing the amount of fuel you need is more then worth avoiding having to manufacture an entire rocket over again. A rocket has many tons of expensive materials with lots of high precision manufacturing techniques. A quick google search turns up an estimate of 90 million per starship, and the total fuel cost per launch with some napkin math is roughly 1.2 million. Its just not comparable at all.

>>16431755
what's your point? do think im asking because i dont know?

>>16431762
Reusability has been proven as seen by everyone else on the planet suddenly scrambling to catch up.

>>16431770
i know. im talking to the other guy who seems to want to call it all crap and pointless, but who can't offer a single set of numbers to back it up

>>16431742
I know they already do. They need to be convinced to keep paying.
>>16431748
>billions of dollars is nothing
Sure...

>>16431813
did i say it was nothing? No, i said its something (the opposite to nothing, in fact), but that its not a massive amount when you look at the many other kinds of funding the US government has for the many other things going on. Nasa is nearly double that per year, for example. The education budget is $900bn per year. So $15bn over 20 years isn't really making me too shocked.

>>16431753
>>16431756
Two thirds of its revenue comes from defense customers, where do you think that money comes from?

>>16431856
>Two thirds of its revenue comes from defense customers,
SpaceX is a private company and Starlink is a division of SpaceX. How do you have access to the financials of a division of a private company?

>>16431856
would love to see the source for that. you can see what they are launching and for who and estimate the revenue from the standard published launch costs if you like.

>>16431865
>>16431876
Misread the article, two thirds of the entire market come from defense. We know at least 1.8 billion of its revenue comes from a contract with the pentagon though.

>>16431880
if thats a number from last year then starlink made them more than 2x that by itself. projected to keep growing too. But yeah, they launch stuff defense contractors, i get it. because they have the best launch package.

>>16430541
>you will live in the pod
>you will own nothing
>you will kill your children
>and you will be happy

nobody is forcing you to go into space, faggot

>>16430541
>but have you tried having sex?
You should take your own advice, OP. But you’d almost certainly get hiv from your first black boyfriend

>>16432073
They are going to start forcing white people to go to space.

>>16431758
>>16431730

Getting a few dozen starships to those Near Earth Asteroids means you have a lot of the work of building very large spaceships already done. Obviously this wouldn't be a one year endeavor-- it'd take time to process all that mass. But the material is super easy to move around... 20cm/s escape velocity means you can move around battleship sized chunks of matter with your bare hands. To a large extent, it doesn't matter what your ship is made of... a few dozen meters thick melted stone means you're better protected from radiation on your ship than on Earth.

I literally don't understand how this isn't the way forward. If you wanted to have a million tonne space ship, how else would you do it? 7000 starship launches?

>>16430541
>have you tried having sex?
Yes
Have you?

File: 1728851880680311.jpg (1.32 MB, 2731x4096)

1.32 MB JPG

The technology gained from the result of this huge as fuck cheap as fuck and rapid launching space vehicle will be immense. We will be building infastructure in space like crazy and with that comes a significant amount of R&D and challenges. That all leads to crazy advancement in daily lifestyle technology, just like Apollo did for us but this will be on a larger scale.

To top that off we will have access to basically unending rare resources.

Man, the EDS among reddit leftoids is really getting out of hand. They're so desperate for him to fail in all his ventures.

>>16432891
Its absolutely ridiculous. They are such useful idiots.

>>16432891
Reddit loves Elon what are you talking about. Outer space is reddit.

>>16432915
>Reddit loves Elon
You have no idea what you're talking about

>>16432915
Ten years ago, yes. Now? He's Hitler raised to the Trumpth power. I'm sure you can find a corner here or there that doesn't hate him but for 99.9999% of the site, he is the devil.

>>16432919
You are not equipt to have this conversation with me.

>>16432947
Neither are you, you fools have no conception and believe things that are demonstrably incorrect.

>>16432953
>ESL with schizo delusions
You know a cursory glance at a reddit search for Elon's name proves your absurd claim incorrect right?

>>16432953
flat earther detected

File: Asteroid-City-in-Space-15(...).jpg (214 KB, 1536x922)

214 KB JPG

>>16431719
Mass of Bennu equivalent

>>16431456
Continuing to mine and drill on Earth IS slowly, gradually strangling the biosphere, ideally all heavy industry (and its pollution) could eventually be conducted off-world

>>16430541
it's a white thing, you wouldnt understand

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5whlQBnsJnI&t=495s

>>16431053
this is retarded. The value of asteroids expressed in dollars is meaningless - asteroids enable unfathomable abundance. Imagine manufacturing a trillion starships on earth - sounds impossible right? But in space, that is only the beginning.

>>16430801
>We know it's just him using public money for his own narcissistic PR.
Why is it bad that it is Elon doing it? NASA and space exploration are a waste of money but why is it worse if Elon is in charge of wasting the money?

>>16431053
If gold becomes as abundant as sand we could build cities out of gold. Gold streets, gold cars, wipe our asses with gold leaf.

>>16430541

> be SpaceX
> almost go bankrupt after 3 failed launches
> hardware for 4th launch is badly damaged en route to launchpad and almost kills its engineer
> expected to fail
> succeed anyway
> retire rocket after one (1) operational launch
> build new 9-engine rocket, also expected to fail
> succeed anyway
> promise new rocket will be reusable
> fail to land it with parachutes
> multi-engine design happens to be perfect for alternative landing method that involves firing with reduced thrust
> compete with aerospace giant to design, build and operate an ISS capsule
> expected to lose
> win anyway (aerospace giant limps across the finish line in 2024)
> journalists laugh as you put landing legs on 9-engine rocket
> reusability will never be practical
> actually land a rocket
> land a rocket at sea
> a year and a half passes and you still haven't reused them
> reusability will never be practical
> actually reuse rocket
> most boosters expended on their second flights
> reusability will never be practical
> launch extremely ambitious 27-engine rocket
> expected to fail on its first flight
> succeed anyway
> plan hundreds of rocket flights to launch satellites to sell expensive broadband to unproven market
> expected to fail
> succeed anyway
> boosters start flying for the 5th, 10th and 20th times
> upper stage cannot land and probably won't ever
> reusability will never be practical
> unveil new super-ultra-hyper-mega-rocket with both stages reusable
> packs more payload than a Saturn V
> looks like a cool sci-fi model
> is expected to fail
> surely the winning streak will end soon?
> super-rocket limps off launchpad, destroys ground hardware, fails to even kill itself. it's over
> super-rocket fails to reach orbit. It's over
> super-rocket fails to land. it's over
> super-rocket tries to land while falling apart. it's over?
> succeed anyway
> try to land super-rocket on fragile launch tower
> expected to fail at least once
> succeed anyway

What's next?

>>16434993
land ship on the other tower

>>16434993
oh, and then get HLS landing, and ship reentering without hotflap syndrome from higher and higher orbits, then landing on the tower, with some refueling action in orbit too. then get your ass to mars

>>16432963
Tell me more dr Reddit expert

File: mystery.jpg (9 KB, 260x194)

9 KB JPG

>>16430541

File: Internet_20241016_114058_10.jpg (3 KB, 101x125)

3 KB JPG

>>16430558
Bro this is the most over dramatic thing I read all day.

Lmao

>>16434993
Refueling failure, which won't explode or do anything interesting. The two craft will just sit there and nothing will happen. Boring. It'll turn out to be some frozen valve, to which they'll add a heater, and it'll work fine the next time.

File: 1705556370794695.png (8 KB, 251x249)

8 KB PNG

>>16430541
>Can someone put me in the mindset
No. But I will encourage you to go kill yourself.

>>16430541
blud going through his edgy contrarian phase :skull:

>>16435423
you should tell them about the potential for frozen valves and head this problem off before it happens.

>>16436142
Hating Elon Musk is pretty mainstream now.
>>16436143
Ain't my jerb and I don't work for free.

>>16436197
you shall be held responsible

>>16430541
Two options:
>spread life throughout universe
>stay here and die

You will not be allowed in the galactic ethnostate

>>16430541
>but how does the scientific and technological advancement of humankind affect you personally?

>>16436219
I'm ok with people blaming me for something boring, especially a boring failure. It's kinda my thing.

File: Uncle Ted.png (1.34 MB, 1024x1024)

1.34 MB PNG

>>16436330
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

>>16430885
>personally i find it exciting to see and learn about what it takes to have a 25-30 story tower fly 46 miles up and at least that down range, turn around, and then land itself on the exact spot it launched from.
All the while the earth is supposedly spinning 1000mph!

File: kvetching.png (303 KB, 622x511)

303 KB PNG

>>16436197
>Hating Elon Musk is pretty mainstream now.
Jewish media and their paid leftist NPC golem shills on social media are not the "mainstream"

>>16436488
Wishes aren't reality. There's no secret mainstream army that happens to have your exact beliefs ready to overthrow the "Jewish media and their paid leftist NPC golem shills on social media". Normies are lining up for more.

>>16436197
Mainstream as in propaganda bots just like their hate for Trump. No real policy hate or even personal hate, just surface level programming.

>>16436608
>There's no secret mainstream army
Ever heard of the "silent majority?"

The majority of normal people do not put pronouns in their is at work and social media

The majority of normal people do not think me can get pregnant

The majority of people can easily define what a woman is

The majority of normal people do not think their borders should be wide open

The majority of normal people do not think it is ok to genocide people in Gaza

The majority of normal people do not hate elon musk, he has over 200 million followers on twatter, more than anyone else in the world by orders of magnitude

The majority of normal people do not hate Donald Trump

The majority of normal people do not like kamala Harris

The majority of normal people do think Donald Trump or any other Republican or right wing influencers are "russian assets"

The majority of normal people do not believe Russia had any meaningful influence on our elections


>Wishes aren't reality
Good advice, you should take it and leave whatever la la land retards like you come from

>>16436676
The majority of normal people do *not* think Donald Trump

apologies for the typos, m keyboard keys are sicking since it is getting cold

>>16436380
and what's the problem exactly? look at its reentry speed. another 1600kmh (though its obviously less than that because boca chica isn't on the equator) isn't so much

>>16436380
you ever wonder how airplanes perform inflight refueling? have a think about it.

>>16436676
all the while the jewish media and their paid for politicians are trying to convince you otherwise on all of these

I forgot to add

File: reasons to live starship.jpg (236 KB, 532x1199)

236 KB JPG

>>16430541
rockets are cool

File: 1365659364892.gif (1.33 MB, 400x276)

1.33 MB GIF

>>16436380
>All the while the earth is supposedly spinning 1000mph!
Next time you're in a car going highway speeds, bring a baseball. Toss it up in the air and catch it...

>"WHOA, HOW THE FUCK DIDN'T THE BASEBALL SUDDENLY ACCELERATE TO A 70 MPH LINE DRIVE AND BREAK THE CAR WINDOW?!1!"

Retard.

>>16436822
how come piss doesnt shoot all over me when I am taking a leak on a plane? It goes straight into the bowl where I aim it. What black magix is this?

>>16436835
you have no idea of the power of your backside

>>16430541
Absolutely based post. Until we reach .01c I do NOT give a flying fuck about space.

File: 132461343519.png (300 KB, 464x360)

300 KB PNG

>>16436835
This is why the flight attendant has to carefully pour your shot from the sampler bottle into a plastic cup...if she releases that little shot bottle for even an instant, it will accelerate to subsonic ballistic speeds and kill a passenger sitting only one row behind you.

Flight attendants spend all their free time in the gym, doing wrist curls to get the Popeye forearms necessary to prevent such a calamity.

>>16436866
>Until we reach .01c I do NOT give a flying fuck about space.
We're getting there...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_Solar_Probe
>It will approach to within 9.86 solar radii (6.9 million km or 4.3 million miles) from the center of the Sun, and by 2025 will travel, at closest approach, as fast as 690,000 km/h (430,000 mph) or 191 km/s, which is 0.064% the speed of light. It is the fastest object ever built.

>Your life is really so empty, you care about this?
Yes.
>What even is the goal?
Expand. I don't feel at ease unless I know people can live is way more places in the universe we observe than a single planet.

>>16432514
>how else would you do it? 7000 starship launches?
Yes. It's just a cost function. Manufacturing on Earth is cheap. You have labor, supply chains, and free air. Adding a flat extra shipping charge to materials will be cheaper than attempting to operate in space for the foreseeable future. That's why the only realistic space civ plan right now is an attempt to replicate Earth's industry on a different planet. Space itself is just too expensive. MAYBE you'll have lunar gravel bagged up and launched for some sort of station shielding but any processing is going to be done down a well for a very long time.

>>16430541
I bet you jizz your pants at the thought of owning an expensive car.