this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2024
86 points (93.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5353 readers
2541 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Why is SpaceX on that I mean I know "musk bad", but seriously they're doing well. Just put Boeing on there again this time for Starliner.

[–] MonkderDritte@feddit.de 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I first thought it was the Starliner. Then the group would have been "full of technical issues".

[–] whyalone@lemm.ee -5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

They are not doing well, they take tax payer money and blow them up, literally.

[–] EpeeGnome@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

They are paid both taxpayer and private money to put things, including people now, safely into orbit. A thing they do frequently and reliably, without any explosions. Yes, their dramatically destructive development method of launching unproven prototypes and pushing them to the limit does seem wasteful, but it actually has allowed their engineers to very effectively identify the weak points in their systems and remove or compensate for them, resulting in designs that are redundant only where needed, but still reliable. Despite a lot of competition from international and the older American aerospace companies, they remain one of the most cost effective and reliable options for space launches in the game.

Now, I'm all for some Musk mocking these days after how much of a jackass he's revealed himself to be, and I am now convinced that Space-X succeeded in spite of him, but it is successful.

[–] whyalone@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

I would think that best musk debunker is thunderfoot, have a look at his videos and you will see musks snake oil https://youtu.be/F3JTafTEDv0?si=i9pbP4GyVq3f6FIV

[–] OceanSoap@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It is and it isn’t. If NASA sent up rockets like them, blew them up, and said “that’s what we wanted to happen!”, at the same tax dollar spent ratio, there would be congressional hearings and massive outrage.

[–] ZMoney@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

When you build new things they necessarily blow up during the development process. NASA is hobbled by a flat budget so they can't afford to blow anything up. So they can't build anything new, which is why SLS is a bunch of old parts scrapped together.

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

SLS is a bunch of old parts scrapped together.

True. But those old parts scrapped together is what makes SLS beautiful. :P

[–] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

You mean like Bikini Atoll?