4 ms·

> Personally, to live a humble life is not very inspiring or interesting to me. Personally, Blue Origin has not done work that inspires me. Specifically Blue

by lev99 8y ago

> Personally, to live a humble life is not very inspiring or interesting to me. Personally, Blue Origin has not done work that inspires me. Specifically Blue Origin's New Shepard spacecraft seems to be reaching for the wrong benchmarks. They claim to enter space, and they do, but going straight up and down isn't nearly as valuable as orbital rockets. Blue Origin's timeline for entering orbit puts them years after Nasa's SLS, meaning they will be third to market for US based orbital launches, while competing with a large number of international competitors. New Shepard, Blue Origin's best success story, has less thrust than a North Korean ICBM. Many charities are doing more impressive and inspiring work than Blue Origin.

thefounder 8y ago
>> Personally, Blue Origin has not done work that inspires me. Perhaps you should give it some time. Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. More exciting than donating my wealth before I die. Good people get employed there for good salaries so if they want to donate to charity they can do so. It looks like a good distribution of wealth regardless if the space program works out or not. Simply donating to a charity doesn't guarantee good results either. If would be up to me I would invest in biotech but I don't see space tech a waste of money either.
- oblio 8y ago
  > Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. While I agree with the feeling, I should point out that "private citizen" Jeff Bezos is worth more than 130 out of 190 or so countries out there. You and I are not in the same league as Bezos or his kind. Actually, are you also a billionaire? :)
- lev99 8y ago
  > Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. I interpret SpaceX and Blue Origin as signs that nation states are decreasing in power relative to corporations. Many executives in very large cooperations probably hold more power than the average congressman.
JackCh 8y ago
>Blue Origin's timeline for entering orbit puts them years after Nasa's SLS, meaning they will be third to market for US based orbital launches Discounting Orbital ATK and ULA?
whazor 8y ago
They are probably investing in employees, facilities, software infrastructure, and knowledge. It is smarter to start with a feasible project and start improving from there, then building something too big which you might not be able to launch successfully.
- lev99 8y ago
  While this is true in general, I haven't seen plans that make me confident in Blue Origins long term vision. It's perfectly okay for a rocket company to blow up a few rockets. I cannot think of a single space program that has a perfect record.

by lev99 8y ago

thefounder 8y ago

>> Personally, Blue Origin has not done work that inspires me. Perhaps you should give it some time. Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. More exciting than donating my wealth before I die. Good people get employed there for good salaries so if they want to donate to charity they can do so. It looks like a good distribution of wealth regardless if the space program works out or not. Simply donating to a charity doesn't guarantee good results either. If would be up to me I would invest in biotech but I don't see space tech a waste of money either.

oblio 8y ago
> Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. While I agree with the feeling, I should point out that "private citizen" Jeff Bezos is worth more than 130 out of 190 or so countries out there. You and I are not in the same league as Bezos or his kind. Actually, are you also a billionaire? :)
lev99 8y ago
> Knowing that a private citizen can start a space programs is exciting enough for me. I interpret SpaceX and Blue Origin as signs that nation states are decreasing in power relative to corporations. Many executives in very large cooperations probably hold more power than the average congressman.

JackCh 8y ago

>Blue Origin's timeline for entering orbit puts them years after Nasa's SLS, meaning they will be third to market for US based orbital launches Discounting Orbital ATK and ULA?

whazor 8y ago

They are probably investing in employees, facilities, software infrastructure, and knowledge. It is smarter to start with a feasible project and start improving from there, then building something too big which you might not be able to launch successfully.

lev99 8y ago
While this is true in general, I haven't seen plans that make me confident in Blue Origins long term vision. It's perfectly okay for a rocket company to blow up a few rockets. I cannot think of a single space program that has a perfect record.