After giving in to Putin/Xi’s demands to not provide starlink internet service over Taiwan, DOD officials are growing nervous about trusting Elon’s Space company with our national secrets

  • Burninator05@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I 100% agree with you but is there someone else in thr US who can reliably launch satellites? I know several othe companies are developing these systems but I don’t think any are anywhere close to Space X’s reliability or capability.

    Space X is doing some awesome stuff and I hate that the awesome has to be tempered by the owner is a piece of shit.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      They’re only able to do it because they’ve received trillions of dollars from the federal government.

      They should nationalize SpaceX before they ever let someone like Musk get the security clearance needed to be in that position.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      SpaceX is wasting government money, they have almost spent all of the money they were given to land people on the moon, on building a rocket that can’t do basic stuff.

      That is not awesome.

      • dev_null@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        A single launch of a Boeing rocket costs as much as the entire R&D for SpaceX rockets. Launches that cost $5 billion with Boeing, cost tens of millions with SpaceX. I can absolutely agree with you that SpaceX is wasting some of the money given to them. But the amount of taxpayer money spent on launches has been massively reduced by them providing an orders of magnitude cheaper and more reliable option.

        There is definitely an argument to be made that they don’t deserve the money, but in the grand scheme of government spending, they have very much reduced it compared to the traditional launch providers.

        And their rockets still have capabilities that no other launch provider has achieved yet. Boeing still wastes all their rockets by making them single use, when SpaceX uses the same rocket many times.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Compairing SpaceX and Boeing is wrong when talking about savings.

          Compare a SpaceX launch to a Shuttle launch yo be more accurate, and don’t forget the inflation

          • AA5B@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            Damn, we don’t have enough zeros for that. That’s more like the Russian fine against Bozos

          • dev_null@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            There is an important fact about the Space Shuttle: it doesn’t exist anymore. Even if it was cheaper - which it wasn’t - it wouldn’t have meant much today, because today all other existing options are much more expensive. I’m comparing options we have today, and more importantly comparing to the option SpaceX moved the government off of.

            If NASA brings back the space shuttle and it’s cheaper than SpaceX then amazing, let’s go. But they didn’t (because it wouldn’t have been cheaper).