6 ms·

Wow, gotta love how this article just hand-waives away the completely legitimate concerns/criticisms that this is nothing more than a way to stroke billionaire'

Wow, gotta love how this article just hand-waives away the completely legitimate concerns/criticisms that this is nothing more than a way to stroke billionaire's egos. Talking about moving mining to space/asteroids is supposed to be a noble goal? The tone deafness is astounding. A billionaire went into space (and the launchpad bill was footed by taxpayers who will probably never see space) and we are supposed to cheer this on? I think not.

codesternews 5y ago
I am here before you get crushed by HN!! lol Cynicism at next level.
- Jochim 5y ago
  It might be more productive if you explain what it is about GP's post you actually disagree with. Personally I find the fact that we've set up a system where a few rich guys can burn obscene amounts of money in a dick measuring competition while people in their own countries increasingly increasingly lack stable income/house/food pretty abhorrent.
  - bpodgursky 5y ago
    > increasingly lack stable income/house/food This is a good soundbyte, but misses that the world overall is getting richer and safer every year. The UK is not getting poorer. The US is not either. There's always going to be someone, somewhere who falls through the cracks. That doesn't mean we need to stop humans from exploring the solar system until everyone, everywhere is covered. If you really care about solving homelessness and income inequality everywhere, why not take it from the truly "useless" industries like entertainment, cosmetics, toys, or luxury cars? Rather than the one industry trying to build a long-term future for humanity. The US spends $50B a year on pet food or whatever. Get rid of the pets and take that money if you want. I don't see why you are offended that a couple billion is being spent on something that actually matters.
    - sam0x17 5y ago
      > That doesn't mean we need to stop humans from exploring the solar system until everyone, everywhere is covered. Sending billionaires into space so they can film Tik-Toks from an in-orbit Tesla roadster and get mining rights to all the precious metals in the solar system while patenting and monopolizing critical space travel tech doesn't advance humanity at all, it sets us back. Government investment in and exploration of space pushes us forward, as do massive taxes on billionaires and redistributing their wealth to the general populace and public works projects. It's astounding to me that there is any non-billionaire alive that doesn't realize this.
      - bpodgursky 5y ago
        You are just asserting things that sound good on Twitter. Please try to have a more constructive dialog on HN.
        sam0x17 5y ago
        How many more astrophysicists would we have if the current wealth of the top 10 billionaires went to our educational system and bringing people out of poverty? Sending billionaires into space accomplishes nothing that the rest of humanity can benefit from, and actually would do a good bit of damage to our future. Sure, the tech will get better, but it will be patented and upcharged in a way similar to our pharmaceutical industry, only with fewer regulations. Space is too important a frontier and space exploration is too important an endeavor to squander in this way. We need NASA in space, not billionaires.
      - guntars 5y ago
        At this point any kind of business that does repeatable and sustainable space flights is good, is even if it's for the entertainment of the billionaires. Slowly and surely the process will get improved and the cost will go down and maybe some of those taxpayers will see space after all.
        sam0x17 5y ago
  - scrollaway 5y ago
    What are they burning exactly, other than fuel? The money isn't disappearing, it's going to people feeding their families and creating research valuable to humanity as a whole. So, exactly, what the fuck is Bad about this?
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      Most of the money will go into Branson's pockets. A vanishingly small fraction of that will feed people's families.
      - scrollaway 5y ago
        So, are they burning money or making money then, what is it? There's no argument, no logic, just people seeing "Hm, billionaire, things I can't do, must be bad" Even in the least charitable readings, this sort of venture is so immeasurably better than the the myriad other ridiculous things billionaires do Just Because They Can.
        rbanffy 5y ago
        Your reasoning seems a bit flawed. If most of the money they skim off a business like this would be going back into the economy - if the owner of the company spent the money they accrue, would they still be billionaires? There's an upper limit on how much you can spend. You can own a dozen private jets, a dozen castles, but you can't be on more than one at any given time. And, by not being on any given one for longer than a couple months every year, you can pretty much avoid paying taxes anywhere.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
vmception 5y ago
They won the X Prize, accomplished its goals and threw a party alongside it. I cant see fault in that. The X Prize was publicly funded big whoop. I’m all for subsequent efforts using no public resources aside a regulatory agency curbing the excesses of privatized space efforts.
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  X Prize isn't publicly funded, it's not taxpayer money.
- joshstrange 5y ago
  > To entice Branson and his space ambitions, taxpayers in New Mexico funded the bulk of the costs for the $220 million Spaceport America. This was not, to my understanding, connected to the X Prize. Also they didn't win the X Prize according this article [0]. [0] > A team led by Burt Rutan would [claim the X Prize eight years later](https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2004/06/3908-2/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2004/06/3908-2/), barely within the deadline. Rutan’s team built SpaceShipOne, a small rocket-powered vehicle dropped from an aircraft.
  - keepper 5y ago
    Or you know, you could just go to their website and confirm that in fact, they did win it[0] There will always be naysayers, detractors, and people who will always question the value of exporation and human inventiveness. Like in business, if it was obvious, it would have long been done. Yes, it does tak ea bit of brashness and self serving to do new things. and their practically is seldomly obvious at the beginning. But this is EXACTLY how humanity moves forward!!! The crazy ones, the selfish ones. The ones that sometimes do it for the glory, or just because its' hard. It's very easy to critique, but in the words or someone else... "what have you done that is so great?" [0]https://www.xprize.org/prizes/ansari https://www.xprize.org/prizes/ansari
    - keepper 5y ago
      oh, and the relation to virgin galactic... " In 2004, it signed a deal with Virgin Galactic to develop the Virgin SpaceShip, a suborbital spacecraft, for space tourism. Virgin Group and Scaled Composites have subsequently formed a joint venture, The Spaceship Company, to manufacture the spacecraft."[0] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Aerospace_Ventures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Aerospace_Ventures
lapp0 5y ago
It's ars technica, pretty much everything they write has this creepy techno-hopium spin on it, to cater to the worshippers of technology and its ability to eventually, magically fix any problem.
bpodgursky 5y ago
There's nothing legitimate about these concerns. It's a Twitter-stoked outrage that the billionaire isn't spending their money on some random Twitter-poster's pet project. Go away.
- shoto_io 5y ago
  Even though I think you might have a point, I don't like to see the Twitter-like tone on HN...
blakesterz 5y ago
They do indeed hand wave away things like the cost and other concerns and cheer on the "vision"... "The billionaires see a future in which humanity, constrained for resources such as water, food, and energy, fights ever harder for a more meager share. “We really could go down one of two paths,” Garriott said. “In a few decades we could reach a point where we have to ration birth rates, energy, food, and more in a stark way. Or, we could bring back the bounty of resources in space, and now is the time to start that process." It's good that billionaires are looking into a distant future, I can't fault them for that. It surprises me that they're not also looking at the present and wondering how they can also have a meaningful and large impact on problems we have right now that are going to impact that future they see. Those hundreds of millions of dollars and huge number of people working on going into space could be doing some serious work on the ground here. I get it, I really get what they're going after here, but I can't help but think there are really truly better things to do with all that money and time.
- JohnFen 5y ago
  I take it as a very strong signal that at least Branson and Musk have essentially decided that Earth is doomed and they're wanting to get off of it as soon as possible.
lalaithion 5y ago
Of all the ways to stroke the egos of billionaires, this is by far more socially valuable than buying yachts and doing all the other things that billionaires spend their money on.
- nightski 5y ago
  When billionaires spend their wealth it is far more beneficial than if they lock it up in stock. When they buy a yacht it feeds that entire supply chain. not to mention all the other things along the way like docking fees, maintenance, insurance, etc... Holding significant amounts of Amazon stock for example only benefits the billionaire, whereas if they sold the stock it could democratize ownership and allow many more to benefit from Amazon's growth.
  - mumblemumble 5y ago
    There's a scene in the Digha Nikaya where the Buddha says there's nothing particularly wrong with having a lot of money, as long as you spend it. The more lavishly, the better. If you spend it, that circulates the wealth and creates jobs. Potentially exciting jobs doing fun, fulfilling things that wouldn't be possible any other way. A couple thousand years ago that was making beautiful things, but making rockets is perhaps not so different? By contrast, if you just hoard it, Warren Buffett style, none of that wealth is doing anybody any good.
  - maximus-decimus 5y ago
    This doesn't disagree with the statement that space travel research is more useful to society than buying a personal yacht.
- hristov 5y ago
  No it isn't. This is incredibly polluting. Yachts are also very polluting. I am not sure what is worse. But there other much more socially valuable ways for billionaires to spend money. Charity, building parks, funding research, giving out scholarships, are all ways of stocking rich peoples egos that are also beneficial to society. Even if you look at adrenaline pumping adventures, you can do helium balloons, sailing yachts, or submarine voyages to the deep ocean. These do not create much pollution.
xeromal 5y ago
In the words of the great bill burr, even if they're a psychopath, at least they're on a bicycle or in a space ship rather than spilling oil in the ocean. The more dumb stuff a rich person like this does, the less they're involved in doing truly bad shit. Inb4 fumes from the ship killing earth.
rrss 5y ago
Sounds like you are upset with the state Government of New Mexico and the voters in whatever counties for funding Spaceport America. Those entities are the ones responsible for how they choose to spend money, not Branson. Branson is doing this because he thinks there is money to be made flying rich people to space. Spaceport America was funded because the funding entities thought there was money to be made by doing it. The majority of the investment for virgin galactic’s program was private, and a lot came from people who already booked flights to space.

codesternews 5y ago

I am here before you get crushed by HN!! lol Cynicism at next level.

Jochim 5y ago
It might be more productive if you explain what it is about GP's post you actually disagree with. Personally I find the fact that we've set up a system where a few rich guys can burn obscene amounts of money in a dick measuring competition while people in their own countries increasingly increasingly lack stable income/house/food pretty abhorrent.
- bpodgursky 5y ago
  > increasingly lack stable income/house/food This is a good soundbyte, but misses that the world overall is getting richer and safer every year. The UK is not getting poorer. The US is not either. There's always going to be someone, somewhere who falls through the cracks. That doesn't mean we need to stop humans from exploring the solar system until everyone, everywhere is covered. If you really care about solving homelessness and income inequality everywhere, why not take it from the truly "useless" industries like entertainment, cosmetics, toys, or luxury cars? Rather than the one industry trying to build a long-term future for humanity. The US spends $50B a year on pet food or whatever. Get rid of the pets and take that money if you want. I don't see why you are offended that a couple billion is being spent on something that actually matters.
  - sam0x17 5y ago
    > That doesn't mean we need to stop humans from exploring the solar system until everyone, everywhere is covered. Sending billionaires into space so they can film Tik-Toks from an in-orbit Tesla roadster and get mining rights to all the precious metals in the solar system while patenting and monopolizing critical space travel tech doesn't advance humanity at all, it sets us back. Government investment in and exploration of space pushes us forward, as do massive taxes on billionaires and redistributing their wealth to the general populace and public works projects. It's astounding to me that there is any non-billionaire alive that doesn't realize this.
    - bpodgursky 5y ago
      You are just asserting things that sound good on Twitter. Please try to have a more constructive dialog on HN.
      - sam0x17 5y ago
        How many more astrophysicists would we have if the current wealth of the top 10 billionaires went to our educational system and bringing people out of poverty? Sending billionaires into space accomplishes nothing that the rest of humanity can benefit from, and actually would do a good bit of damage to our future. Sure, the tech will get better, but it will be patented and upcharged in a way similar to our pharmaceutical industry, only with fewer regulations. Space is too important a frontier and space exploration is too important an endeavor to squander in this way. We need NASA in space, not billionaires.
    - guntars 5y ago
      At this point any kind of business that does repeatable and sustainable space flights is good, is even if it's for the entertainment of the billionaires. Slowly and surely the process will get improved and the cost will go down and maybe some of those taxpayers will see space after all.
      - sam0x17 5y ago
- scrollaway 5y ago
  What are they burning exactly, other than fuel? The money isn't disappearing, it's going to people feeding their families and creating research valuable to humanity as a whole. So, exactly, what the fuck is Bad about this?
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    Most of the money will go into Branson's pockets. A vanishingly small fraction of that will feed people's families.
    - scrollaway 5y ago
      So, are they burning money or making money then, what is it? There's no argument, no logic, just people seeing "Hm, billionaire, things I can't do, must be bad" Even in the least charitable readings, this sort of venture is so immeasurably better than the the myriad other ridiculous things billionaires do Just Because They Can.
      - rbanffy 5y ago
        Your reasoning seems a bit flawed. If most of the money they skim off a business like this would be going back into the economy - if the owner of the company spent the money they accrue, would they still be billionaires? There's an upper limit on how much you can spend. You can own a dozen private jets, a dozen castles, but you can't be on more than one at any given time. And, by not being on any given one for longer than a couple months every year, you can pretty much avoid paying taxes anywhere.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

vmception 5y ago

They won the X Prize, accomplished its goals and threw a party alongside it. I cant see fault in that. The X Prize was publicly funded big whoop. I’m all for subsequent efforts using no public resources aside a regulatory agency curbing the excesses of privatized space efforts.

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
X Prize isn't publicly funded, it's not taxpayer money.
joshstrange 5y ago
> To entice Branson and his space ambitions, taxpayers in New Mexico funded the bulk of the costs for the $220 million Spaceport America. This was not, to my understanding, connected to the X Prize. Also they didn't win the X Prize according this article [0]. [0] > A team led by Burt Rutan would [claim the X Prize eight years later](https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2004/06/3908-2/ https://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2004/06/3908-2/), barely within the deadline. Rutan’s team built SpaceShipOne, a small rocket-powered vehicle dropped from an aircraft.
- keepper 5y ago
  Or you know, you could just go to their website and confirm that in fact, they did win it[0] There will always be naysayers, detractors, and people who will always question the value of exporation and human inventiveness. Like in business, if it was obvious, it would have long been done. Yes, it does tak ea bit of brashness and self serving to do new things. and their practically is seldomly obvious at the beginning. But this is EXACTLY how humanity moves forward!!! The crazy ones, the selfish ones. The ones that sometimes do it for the glory, or just because its' hard. It's very easy to critique, but in the words or someone else... "what have you done that is so great?" [0]https://www.xprize.org/prizes/ansari https://www.xprize.org/prizes/ansari
  - keepper 5y ago
    oh, and the relation to virgin galactic... " In 2004, it signed a deal with Virgin Galactic to develop the Virgin SpaceShip, a suborbital spacecraft, for space tourism. Virgin Group and Scaled Composites have subsequently formed a joint venture, The Spaceship Company, to manufacture the spacecraft."[0] [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Aerospace_Ventures https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mojave_Aerospace_Ventures

lapp0 5y ago

It's ars technica, pretty much everything they write has this creepy techno-hopium spin on it, to cater to the worshippers of technology and its ability to eventually, magically fix any problem.

bpodgursky 5y ago

There's nothing legitimate about these concerns. It's a Twitter-stoked outrage that the billionaire isn't spending their money on some random Twitter-poster's pet project. Go away.

shoto_io 5y ago
Even though I think you might have a point, I don't like to see the Twitter-like tone on HN...

blakesterz 5y ago

They do indeed hand wave away things like the cost and other concerns and cheer on the "vision"... "The billionaires see a future in which humanity, constrained for resources such as water, food, and energy, fights ever harder for a more meager share. “We really could go down one of two paths,” Garriott said. “In a few decades we could reach a point where we have to ration birth rates, energy, food, and more in a stark way. Or, we could bring back the bounty of resources in space, and now is the time to start that process." It's good that billionaires are looking into a distant future, I can't fault them for that. It surprises me that they're not also looking at the present and wondering how they can also have a meaningful and large impact on problems we have right now that are going to impact that future they see. Those hundreds of millions of dollars and huge number of people working on going into space could be doing some serious work on the ground here. I get it, I really get what they're going after here, but I can't help but think there are really truly better things to do with all that money and time.

JohnFen 5y ago
I take it as a very strong signal that at least Branson and Musk have essentially decided that Earth is doomed and they're wanting to get off of it as soon as possible.

lalaithion 5y ago

Of all the ways to stroke the egos of billionaires, this is by far more socially valuable than buying yachts and doing all the other things that billionaires spend their money on.

nightski 5y ago
When billionaires spend their wealth it is far more beneficial than if they lock it up in stock. When they buy a yacht it feeds that entire supply chain. not to mention all the other things along the way like docking fees, maintenance, insurance, etc... Holding significant amounts of Amazon stock for example only benefits the billionaire, whereas if they sold the stock it could democratize ownership and allow many more to benefit from Amazon's growth.
- mumblemumble 5y ago
  There's a scene in the Digha Nikaya where the Buddha says there's nothing particularly wrong with having a lot of money, as long as you spend it. The more lavishly, the better. If you spend it, that circulates the wealth and creates jobs. Potentially exciting jobs doing fun, fulfilling things that wouldn't be possible any other way. A couple thousand years ago that was making beautiful things, but making rockets is perhaps not so different? By contrast, if you just hoard it, Warren Buffett style, none of that wealth is doing anybody any good.
- maximus-decimus 5y ago
  This doesn't disagree with the statement that space travel research is more useful to society than buying a personal yacht.
hristov 5y ago
No it isn't. This is incredibly polluting. Yachts are also very polluting. I am not sure what is worse. But there other much more socially valuable ways for billionaires to spend money. Charity, building parks, funding research, giving out scholarships, are all ways of stocking rich peoples egos that are also beneficial to society. Even if you look at adrenaline pumping adventures, you can do helium balloons, sailing yachts, or submarine voyages to the deep ocean. These do not create much pollution.

xeromal 5y ago

In the words of the great bill burr, even if they're a psychopath, at least they're on a bicycle or in a space ship rather than spilling oil in the ocean. The more dumb stuff a rich person like this does, the less they're involved in doing truly bad shit. Inb4 fumes from the ship killing earth.

rrss 5y ago

Sounds like you are upset with the state Government of New Mexico and the voters in whatever counties for funding Spaceport America. Those entities are the ones responsible for how they choose to spend money, not Branson. Branson is doing this because he thinks there is money to be made flying rich people to space. Spaceport America was funded because the funding entities thought there was money to be made by doing it. The majority of the investment for virgin galactic’s program was private, and a lot came from people who already booked flights to space.