4 ms·

Why is this downvoted? There is some serious tribalism going on in this thread. You all need to chill out and start thinking again. Who cares whether BO or S

Why is this downvoted? There is some serious tribalism going on in this thread. You all need to chill out and start thinking again. Who cares whether BO or SpaceX was first, or whether China or America was first? We should be happy that humanity is closer to Mars.

CamperBob2 11y ago
It probably wouldn't have come up if Bezos hadn't thumped his chest in Musk's direction, or if Musk hadn't taken the bait. Competitive people are competitive. Film (and Twitter fight) at 11...
justinsingh 11y ago
I for one think that giving credit where credit is due is an important thing.
- sillysaurus3 11y ago
  Getting off this rock is probably the only thing that matters. Credit is irrelevant when Earth is no longer habitable and we never left.
  - CamperBob2 11y ago
    That, and I want to see an Epic Rap Battle of History between Musk and Bezos some day. It will take a lot of competition and a lot of progress before they have enough dirt to throw at each other.
    - sillysaurus3 11y ago
      Hahaha... Thanks, that cheered me up. Someone should totally do rap battles while pretending to be some famous figure. The possibilities are endless. Faux Bill Gates vs Faux Steve Jobs.
      - pnt12 11y ago
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njos57IJf-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njos57IJf-0 It's a bit silly, but entertaining. It doesn't get too technical, but usually gets the generic facts right.
        sillysaurus3 11y ago
        Best Christmas ever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N_RO-jL-90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N_RO-jL-90 was hilarious.
      - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
        If you're being serious, one of the most viewed Youtube channels is "Epic Rap Battles of History" which did exactly that.
      - CamperBob2 11y ago
        Yeah, don't follow that link pnt12 posted until you have a whole afternoon to kill.
  - justinsingh 11y ago
    People who compete want to get recognition for their accomplishments. "Getting off this rock" has so far been led closer to becoming true by cold hard competition. So sorry bud, people will always want credit for their success whether you like it or not. And hey, who said we won't get off this rock during the process of all that?
  - grey-area 11y ago
    I agree the tribalism is not helpful on either side, but Blue origins is nowhere near getting off this rock, or even into orbit around it.
TeMPOraL 11y ago
This is not tribalism; those two achievements have an order of magnitude difference at difficulty and practical meaning, and Bezos wasn't first in his class either. I was very happy for Blue Origin then and I'm happy for everyone who pushes the boundaries of space technology (hell, I even start to like ULA), but those two landings are not comparable, and trying to do so diminishes what just happened.
hoorayimhelping 11y ago
>Why is this downvoted I can't give the exact answer but if I had to guess, I'd say it's a consistently argumentative attitude under the guise of asking questions. The commenter has asked the same question "what makes this SpaceX thing so special?" at different points of this thread and has gotten many different answers providing a bunch of different view points. They're not trying to get clarity, they're trying to convince people that this isn't an accomplishment, and there seems to be a hint of accusation ("you only think this is better than BO because HN loves Musk and hates Bezos") in the questions. That's my guess.
- grkvlt 11y ago
  Sort of... I knew I would get downvoted, mostly because of my failure at SpaceX cheerleading ;) I actually agree that SpaceX did an awesome thing, and really do understand that its more complicated, and difficult, and challenging, and so on, than what Blue Origin managed to do; yes. My point was more of a "HN loves SpaceX and cannot acknowledge that they might not be the best in the world at everything, ever" thing, rather than any technical breakdown. I would also maintain that the 100km altitude flight is important - it's the internationally recognised boundary of space - and that the 'first' that Blue Shepherd claimed was valid, since the SpaceX Grasshopper did not cross the 100km Karman line. The important parts are that the flight is of a 1.) reusable, 2.) VTOL, 3.) rocket after a 4.) 100km altitude space flight. Since all four points are valid for SpaceX's Falcon 9 first stage booster, I think it's technically correct to place its landing in the same category as Blue Origin's New Shepherd landing. SpaceX's achievement is more technically interesting and useful, but that should not detract from what Blue Origin managed to do with a much smaller team and budget.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    The key difference is, again, space vs. orbit, i.e. 4). 100km vertical hop is not meaningful for lowering costs of spaceflight. Comparable feats have been done before, as pointed out multiple times in this subthread. You can't just take New Shepard and use it as a first-stage booster; it's a rocket designed for the very easiest component of spaceflight, i.e. going high, and completely unsuitable for putting anything in orbit - which means going very very fast horizontally. OTOH, SpaceX landed an actual booster - a much bigger rocket designed to put payload into orbit - which again, means going very very fast horizontally, and then having to reverse that flight and navigate to a proper landing site. What SpaceX did impacts spaceflight significantly. What Bezos did (and SpaceX before him, and others before them) does not.
mikeash 11y ago
It's not "tribalism" to understand that Blue Origin's landing was fun but irrelevant unless you want to play five-minute space tourist, while SpaceX's landing is a massively significant event for the future of space travel.

CamperBob2 11y ago

It probably wouldn't have come up if Bezos hadn't thumped his chest in Musk's direction, or if Musk hadn't taken the bait. Competitive people are competitive. Film (and Twitter fight) at 11...

justinsingh 11y ago

I for one think that giving credit where credit is due is an important thing.

sillysaurus3 11y ago
Getting off this rock is probably the only thing that matters. Credit is irrelevant when Earth is no longer habitable and we never left.
- CamperBob2 11y ago
  That, and I want to see an Epic Rap Battle of History between Musk and Bezos some day. It will take a lot of competition and a lot of progress before they have enough dirt to throw at each other.
  - sillysaurus3 11y ago
    Hahaha... Thanks, that cheered me up. Someone should totally do rap battles while pretending to be some famous figure. The possibilities are endless. Faux Bill Gates vs Faux Steve Jobs.
    - pnt12 11y ago
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njos57IJf-0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njos57IJf-0 It's a bit silly, but entertaining. It doesn't get too technical, but usually gets the generic facts right.
      - sillysaurus3 11y ago
        Best Christmas ever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N_RO-jL-90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N_RO-jL-90 was hilarious.
    - Omniusaspirer 11y ago
      If you're being serious, one of the most viewed Youtube channels is "Epic Rap Battles of History" which did exactly that.
    - CamperBob2 11y ago
      Yeah, don't follow that link pnt12 posted until you have a whole afternoon to kill.
- justinsingh 11y ago
  People who compete want to get recognition for their accomplishments. "Getting off this rock" has so far been led closer to becoming true by cold hard competition. So sorry bud, people will always want credit for their success whether you like it or not. And hey, who said we won't get off this rock during the process of all that?
- grey-area 11y ago
  I agree the tribalism is not helpful on either side, but Blue origins is nowhere near getting off this rock, or even into orbit around it.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

This is not tribalism; those two achievements have an order of magnitude difference at difficulty and practical meaning, and Bezos wasn't first in his class either. I was very happy for Blue Origin then and I'm happy for everyone who pushes the boundaries of space technology (hell, I even start to like ULA), but those two landings are not comparable, and trying to do so diminishes what just happened.

hoorayimhelping 11y ago

>Why is this downvoted I can't give the exact answer but if I had to guess, I'd say it's a consistently argumentative attitude under the guise of asking questions. The commenter has asked the same question "what makes this SpaceX thing so special?" at different points of this thread and has gotten many different answers providing a bunch of different view points. They're not trying to get clarity, they're trying to convince people that this isn't an accomplishment, and there seems to be a hint of accusation ("you only think this is better than BO because HN loves Musk and hates Bezos") in the questions. That's my guess.

grkvlt 11y ago
Sort of... I knew I would get downvoted, mostly because of my failure at SpaceX cheerleading ;) I actually agree that SpaceX did an awesome thing, and really do understand that its more complicated, and difficult, and challenging, and so on, than what Blue Origin managed to do; yes. My point was more of a "HN loves SpaceX and cannot acknowledge that they might not be the best in the world at everything, ever" thing, rather than any technical breakdown. I would also maintain that the 100km altitude flight is important - it's the internationally recognised boundary of space - and that the 'first' that Blue Shepherd claimed was valid, since the SpaceX Grasshopper did not cross the 100km Karman line. The important parts are that the flight is of a 1.) reusable, 2.) VTOL, 3.) rocket after a 4.) 100km altitude space flight. Since all four points are valid for SpaceX's Falcon 9 first stage booster, I think it's technically correct to place its landing in the same category as Blue Origin's New Shepherd landing. SpaceX's achievement is more technically interesting and useful, but that should not detract from what Blue Origin managed to do with a much smaller team and budget.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  The key difference is, again, space vs. orbit, i.e. 4). 100km vertical hop is not meaningful for lowering costs of spaceflight. Comparable feats have been done before, as pointed out multiple times in this subthread. You can't just take New Shepard and use it as a first-stage booster; it's a rocket designed for the very easiest component of spaceflight, i.e. going high, and completely unsuitable for putting anything in orbit - which means going very very fast horizontally. OTOH, SpaceX landed an actual booster - a much bigger rocket designed to put payload into orbit - which again, means going very very fast horizontally, and then having to reverse that flight and navigate to a proper landing site. What SpaceX did impacts spaceflight significantly. What Bezos did (and SpaceX before him, and others before them) does not.

mikeash 11y ago

It's not "tribalism" to understand that Blue Origin's landing was fun but irrelevant unless you want to play five-minute space tourist, while SpaceX's landing is a massively significant event for the future of space travel.