5 ms·

OK, I'll be the nay-sayer in this thread. I love space and tech. Love it. We go to JPL every chance we get. My brother in law is a PhD Physicist who works t

OK, I'll be the nay-sayer in this thread. I love space and tech. Love it. We go to JPL every chance we get. My brother in law is a PhD Physicist who works there. Great stuff. Now, that said, I have to wonder how much time, effort, money and energy went into recovering junk from the ocean. And, I have to wonder what other project could have been undertaken that would have produced far greater benefits for society than being able to look at a mangled rocket engine at the Smithsonian. I get it. Guy with a ton of money playing with expensive toys. No problem. We all do that to some extent or another with our disposable income. The problem here, if there is one, is I don't really see much value from recovering this junk. I'd love to know how much the entire adventure (inception to engine-in-museum) will cost. It's probably an obscene amount of money that would have done far greater good elsewhere. <moron negative guy mode OFF>

jlgreco 14y ago
Bezos is taxed, and I imagine gives to charity. Why do his other endeavors have to be charity as well? I cannot understand this mindset at all.
- jordan0day 14y ago
  Well, robomartin didn't say the money would be better spent on charity -- you're misstating the original comment. The problem you should have with robomartin's mindset is that they are saying "Rich person spent $Money on Cool Thing X, when I think it should have been spent on Cool Thing Y! Why would they ever pick X over Y?!", without recognizing that "better-ness" of Y over X is probably very subjective.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    In my view, expecting people to spend their money on something that benefits society rather than on what they otherwise want to spend it on is expecting an informal sort of charity. If the view is that no person should have enough money after taxes to do this sort of thing, that I can understand. I wouldn't agree, but I would understand.
    - robomartin 14y ago
      I've probably done a bad job of communicating the sentiment. As a Libertarian the ABSOLUTE LAST thing I am going to do is tell you how to spend your money. That said, I can express opinion as to the choices you may have made. That does NOT mean I am right. It's just one man's opinion. My general sentiment is that if you are in a position to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on pet projects you have a responsibility to society to make the right choices. Call it a moral or ethical judgement on my part. I do not resent him having money or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK. Pulling up junk from the ocean bottom? Nah, that's bullshit.
      - jlgreco 14y ago
        And what if he both does what he wants, and what you want him to do? Is that acceptable, or will you remain disgruntled until he spends all of his money as you wish? > or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK. Pulling up junk from the ocean bottom? Nah, that's bullshit. What? Have you considered that this is both to him? You make absolutely no sense at all.
        rtwtlkj 14y ago
        Yeah, the guys is a bit incoherent. He claims he is a libertarian while at the same time opining how bezos should spend his money. Money that nobody else has a claim to it anymore but bezos. As long as he is not breaking any laws whom am I to even think what he should do with his money. That is how a true libertarian should think. The fact he doesn't think this way means he is just trying to bullshit us by claiming he is a libertarian or he simply does not understand what the word means [1]. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
        robomartin 14y ago
        Brother, where did I try to tell him how to spend his money? All I said is that spending it raising crap from the bottom of the sea is bullshit. I also indicated this is based on my moral conviction that if you achieve success at that level you have a responsibility towards society not to do crap like that. If you choose to do crap like that, live long and prosper. Your choice. I just don't think it's morally supportable in the context of all else that really needs doing. Look at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as an example of what I think is role-model behavior for the uber-rich. I don't require they behave this way. They are absolutely free to do as they wish. They can even make a big pile with their money and burn it. I am merely stating that from my point of view what Bezos is doing isn't right. That's all. None of this negates a Libertarian doctrine. I should at the same time note that Libertarianism isn't a cookie-cutter system, just like saying someone is a Democrat or a Republican doesn't mean they adhere to 100% of what Wikipedia might say these doctrines consist of. Pure Libertarianism can be a bit extreme. For example, we still need government officials to be there and throw parties when foreign dignitaries visit. Yes, it's a joke! So, how about this: Let's agree to disagree. Back to coding and making money I can then burn.
DanBC 14y ago
It's interesting that my gut reaction to one guy spending a chunk of money is much stronger than a million people spending a couple of bucks - I waste money everyday, so why am I not angry about this chronic wastage?
- robomartin 14y ago
  For the same reason that three hundred million people are not on the street protesting each and every day as our governments runs us into the ground through bullshit wars, inaction on important matters (patents, guns, waste, corruption, etc.). Few people are willing to step out of crowd behavior and stick their heads out. On the subject of wasting personal money, well, for me it's a matter of moral or ethical nature. A billionaire has a responsibility to do good. That's my own moral standing. And I say this as a Libertarian. Picking up junk from the ocean floor is bullshit. It's no different than filling a garage full of every exotic car in production. Senseless.
  - jlgreco 14y ago
    > It's no different than filling a garage full of every exotic car in production. Senseless. So do you have a problem with Jay Leno now too? I am having a really hard time believing that " I do not resent him having money or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK." Tell me, what hobbies can rich people have that wouldn't bother you? Any examples?
    - robomartin 14y ago
      No problem with Jay Leno. No problem with anyone. Can a guy express an opinion based on a personal moral stance without others twisting it into thinking he wants to take over the world and tell everyone what to do and think? It is simply amazing to me how people read what THEY want to read into a statement as opposed to what is actually being said. It's far more of a surprise on HN, where I generally thought people are more intelligent than to do that.
      - 14y ago
mikeash 14y ago
Do you feel compelled to spend your excess money in a way that's most beneficial for humanity? If not, why should Bezos?
- robomartin 14y ago
  Shoot the messenger, ignore the substance of the argument. Yeah, that works.
  - mikeash 14y ago
    You didn't answer either of my questions. I'm not shooting anyone, I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from.
    - robomartin 14y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger You are attacking me instead of the argument. Your logic is incorrect. Here are your questions: >Do you feel compelled to spend your excess money in a way that's most beneficial for humanity? If not, why should Bezos? Let's apply the same logic to another issue: "You say doing drugs is bad for you yet you do drugs. Why should I listen to you and not do drugs?" It is a basic idea in logical reasoning that the messenger and the message are separate. An valid argument can and should stand on its own regardless of who and how it is delivered. The "drugs are bad for you" argument is equally valid if delivered by a Nobel Prize winning PhD in Biology or a homeless high-school drop-out bum with only one tooth. So saying "Well, if you don't do it why should he not do it?" just doesn't address whether or not the original premise and argument is valid or not, even if the messenger is a deranged lunatic. To repeat myself, what I have said in many words is that it is my moral judgement that the uber-rich ought to get behind projects with far more significant and measurable social benefits than lifting junk from the bottom of the ocean. I further put-up the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as a role model. I also pointed out that we have FULLY WORKING versions of these very engines, at least one of which was test fired a couple of months ago: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/f1_test.html http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/f1_test.html And, of course, we have a number of them on static display at various locations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1 So, yeah, from my vantage point, it looks like a waste of money. Is he entitled to do it? Absolutely. Without a doubt. Am I still entitled to my opinion? Yup. Are you entitled to a diametrically opposed opinion? Certainly. See, it all works out in the end.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
wildwood 14y ago
Artifacts from mankind's first expedition to the moon are "junk"? Isn't recovering them meaningful, to help us understand what happened more fully, and by extension to help support interest in space exploration? I suspect that there are a lot of people who disagree with you about the social value of what they're doing. Judging from the coverage that this is getting.
- robomartin 14y ago
  Have you been to the Smithsonian? I have. More than once. It's all there. Yes, this stuff is junk. It will inspire no one to do anything. Don't believe me? Take a bunch of kids to the Air and Space Museum and have them choose between looking at one of the many rocket engines and going in a flight simulator or one of the other exhibits, their choice. Whatch how long they spend in front of the engine vs the other exhibits. Look, I love this stuff. I am the guy spending thirty minutes looking at the amazing mechanical engineering at these exhibits. At the same time I recognize this is not what inspires youngsters.
rdl 14y ago
I'd prefer this money had gone toward directly funding a Mars mission, vs. indirectly recovering items which might be useful for Mars, and I suspect Bezos may feel the same way. Unfortunately there isn't a Mars mission which is "shovel ready" today. Hopefully the Amazon products I bought this week contribute in an indirect way to Bezos's wealth which is later spent directly on a Mars mission.
quahada 14y ago
The economy is not a zero-sum game. I would assume most of the cost of this recovery went to pay labor or procure equipment (whose main cost is also labor, or equipment cost... this is a recursion). That labor cost goes back into the economy, where a portion of that eventually goes to many good causes through taxes or individual charitable donations. The energy (fossil fuel) used to power the ships & equipment is possibly the only cost of this expedition that is used up and gone forever.

jlgreco 14y ago

Bezos is taxed, and I imagine gives to charity. Why do his other endeavors have to be charity as well? I cannot understand this mindset at all.

jordan0day 14y ago
Well, robomartin didn't say the money would be better spent on charity -- you're misstating the original comment. The problem you should have with robomartin's mindset is that they are saying "Rich person spent $Money on Cool Thing X, when I think it should have been spent on Cool Thing Y! Why would they ever pick X over Y?!", without recognizing that "better-ness" of Y over X is probably very subjective.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  In my view, expecting people to spend their money on something that benefits society rather than on what they otherwise want to spend it on is expecting an informal sort of charity. If the view is that no person should have enough money after taxes to do this sort of thing, that I can understand. I wouldn't agree, but I would understand.
  - robomartin 14y ago
    I've probably done a bad job of communicating the sentiment. As a Libertarian the ABSOLUTE LAST thing I am going to do is tell you how to spend your money. That said, I can express opinion as to the choices you may have made. That does NOT mean I am right. It's just one man's opinion. My general sentiment is that if you are in a position to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on pet projects you have a responsibility to society to make the right choices. Call it a moral or ethical judgement on my part. I do not resent him having money or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK. Pulling up junk from the ocean bottom? Nah, that's bullshit.
    - jlgreco 14y ago
      And what if he both does what he wants, and what you want him to do? Is that acceptable, or will you remain disgruntled until he spends all of his money as you wish? > or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK. Pulling up junk from the ocean bottom? Nah, that's bullshit. What? Have you considered that this is both to him? You make absolutely no sense at all.
      - rtwtlkj 14y ago
        Yeah, the guys is a bit incoherent. He claims he is a libertarian while at the same time opining how bezos should spend his money. Money that nobody else has a claim to it anymore but bezos. As long as he is not breaking any laws whom am I to even think what he should do with his money. That is how a true libertarian should think. The fact he doesn't think this way means he is just trying to bullshit us by claiming he is a libertarian or he simply does not understand what the word means [1]. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism
        robomartin 14y ago
        Brother, where did I try to tell him how to spend his money? All I said is that spending it raising crap from the bottom of the sea is bullshit. I also indicated this is based on my moral conviction that if you achieve success at that level you have a responsibility towards society not to do crap like that. If you choose to do crap like that, live long and prosper. Your choice. I just don't think it's morally supportable in the context of all else that really needs doing. Look at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as an example of what I think is role-model behavior for the uber-rich. I don't require they behave this way. They are absolutely free to do as they wish. They can even make a big pile with their money and burn it. I am merely stating that from my point of view what Bezos is doing isn't right. That's all. None of this negates a Libertarian doctrine. I should at the same time note that Libertarianism isn't a cookie-cutter system, just like saying someone is a Democrat or a Republican doesn't mean they adhere to 100% of what Wikipedia might say these doctrines consist of. Pure Libertarianism can be a bit extreme. For example, we still need government officials to be there and throw parties when foreign dignitaries visit. Yes, it's a joke! So, how about this: Let's agree to disagree. Back to coding and making money I can then burn.

DanBC 14y ago

It's interesting that my gut reaction to one guy spending a chunk of money is much stronger than a million people spending a couple of bucks - I waste money everyday, so why am I not angry about this chronic wastage?

robomartin 14y ago
For the same reason that three hundred million people are not on the street protesting each and every day as our governments runs us into the ground through bullshit wars, inaction on important matters (patents, guns, waste, corruption, etc.). Few people are willing to step out of crowd behavior and stick their heads out. On the subject of wasting personal money, well, for me it's a matter of moral or ethical nature. A billionaire has a responsibility to do good. That's my own moral standing. And I say this as a Libertarian. Picking up junk from the ocean floor is bullshit. It's no different than filling a garage full of every exotic car in production. Senseless.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  > It's no different than filling a garage full of every exotic car in production. Senseless. So do you have a problem with Jay Leno now too? I am having a really hard time believing that " I do not resent him having money or having fun with it. That's OK. That's more than OK." Tell me, what hobbies can rich people have that wouldn't bother you? Any examples?
  - robomartin 14y ago
    No problem with Jay Leno. No problem with anyone. Can a guy express an opinion based on a personal moral stance without others twisting it into thinking he wants to take over the world and tell everyone what to do and think? It is simply amazing to me how people read what THEY want to read into a statement as opposed to what is actually being said. It's far more of a surprise on HN, where I generally thought people are more intelligent than to do that.
    - 14y ago

mikeash 14y ago

Do you feel compelled to spend your excess money in a way that's most beneficial for humanity? If not, why should Bezos?

robomartin 14y ago
Shoot the messenger, ignore the substance of the argument. Yeah, that works.
- mikeash 14y ago
  You didn't answer either of my questions. I'm not shooting anyone, I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from.
  - robomartin 14y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_the_messenger You are attacking me instead of the argument. Your logic is incorrect. Here are your questions: >Do you feel compelled to spend your excess money in a way that's most beneficial for humanity? If not, why should Bezos? Let's apply the same logic to another issue: "You say doing drugs is bad for you yet you do drugs. Why should I listen to you and not do drugs?" It is a basic idea in logical reasoning that the messenger and the message are separate. An valid argument can and should stand on its own regardless of who and how it is delivered. The "drugs are bad for you" argument is equally valid if delivered by a Nobel Prize winning PhD in Biology or a homeless high-school drop-out bum with only one tooth. So saying "Well, if you don't do it why should he not do it?" just doesn't address whether or not the original premise and argument is valid or not, even if the messenger is a deranged lunatic. To repeat myself, what I have said in many words is that it is my moral judgement that the uber-rich ought to get behind projects with far more significant and measurable social benefits than lifting junk from the bottom of the ocean. I further put-up the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as a role model. I also pointed out that we have FULLY WORKING versions of these very engines, at least one of which was test fired a couple of months ago: http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/f1_test.html http://www.nasa.gov/exploration/systems/sls/f1_test.html And, of course, we have a number of them on static display at various locations: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocketdyne_F-1 So, yeah, from my vantage point, it looks like a waste of money. Is he entitled to do it? Absolutely. Without a doubt. Am I still entitled to my opinion? Yup. Are you entitled to a diametrically opposed opinion? Certainly. See, it all works out in the end.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

wildwood 14y ago

Artifacts from mankind's first expedition to the moon are "junk"? Isn't recovering them meaningful, to help us understand what happened more fully, and by extension to help support interest in space exploration? I suspect that there are a lot of people who disagree with you about the social value of what they're doing. Judging from the coverage that this is getting.

robomartin 14y ago
Have you been to the Smithsonian? I have. More than once. It's all there. Yes, this stuff is junk. It will inspire no one to do anything. Don't believe me? Take a bunch of kids to the Air and Space Museum and have them choose between looking at one of the many rocket engines and going in a flight simulator or one of the other exhibits, their choice. Whatch how long they spend in front of the engine vs the other exhibits. Look, I love this stuff. I am the guy spending thirty minutes looking at the amazing mechanical engineering at these exhibits. At the same time I recognize this is not what inspires youngsters.

rdl 14y ago

I'd prefer this money had gone toward directly funding a Mars mission, vs. indirectly recovering items which might be useful for Mars, and I suspect Bezos may feel the same way. Unfortunately there isn't a Mars mission which is "shovel ready" today. Hopefully the Amazon products I bought this week contribute in an indirect way to Bezos's wealth which is later spent directly on a Mars mission.

quahada 14y ago

The economy is not a zero-sum game. I would assume most of the cost of this recovery went to pay labor or procure equipment (whose main cost is also labor, or equipment cost... this is a recursion). That labor cost goes back into the economy, where a portion of that eventually goes to many good causes through taxes or individual charitable donations. The energy (fossil fuel) used to power the ships & equipment is possibly the only cost of this expedition that is used up and gone forever.