2 ms·
Yes! Those are all reasonable and plausible. It would have been great to have a discussion rather than banning the content because it dared to question SpaceX.
by brookst 4y ago
Yes! Those are all reasonable and plausible. It would have been great to have a discussion rather than banning the content because it dared to question SpaceX. At the very least, it was only because I happened to see the post before it was removed that I even knew that the February test produced between 10x and 100x as much sound as estimates suggested.
As it stands, I don't know if your explanations are spot-on and the actual sound pressure will be as SpaceX estimates, and most people don't even know if there's a question about it. That doesn't seem... ideal, for the principles HN purports to support.
- sgtnoodle 4y agoI don't know about what happened with the HN thread. I worked at SpaceX for 3 years 10 years ago, though, and at least at the time I didn't observe any hint of intentional impropriety. I personally was in a handful of meetings with NASA folk, and not only was I brutally honest with them, but I can also say that there was no one pressuring me to do otherwise. On the contrary, not that I can provide details, but I witnessed one person immediately getting fired for being less than radically honest in their external communication. I maintain a very high ethical standard for the people I choose to associate with personally and professionally. I would happily go back to working at SpaceX if there was good alignment with my personal goals. It seems unlikely since I now have kids and appreciate infinitely flexible work life balance, but I do look back fondly on my years at SpaceX. Financially and career wise, it was a mutually beneficial arrangement. I don't feel taken advantage of at all. Viewed as an investment, I can only describe my experience as a cornucopia of riches.