>> why does that relevant to a discussion on plans to go to mars?
>It is not relevant to the idea of going to mars. But it is relevant when considering the credibility of the person who is proposing this idea.
The idea either holds weight or does not.
If there were evidence of Musk, for example, raising money for a hyperloop and then stealing all of it I would say - "don't give this man money, for he will steal it all!" - but I still would not have discussed plans of going to mars.
> I am not upset about anything.
Upset was perhaps a poor choice; what I mean is, what is it about the hyperloop that brings you to raise it as a point so many times. It seems as though you feel something shady or untoward has been done, and I am wondering what that is.
> If Elon Musk thought the idea could work, why would not he pursue it himself, or if he is too busy, why not at least fund a prototype (you don't seriously consider the "student competition" to be in the same league, right?) Do you have a straight answer to this question?
First, why would you even think I should have an answer to this question?
I can think of a few reasons why Musk hasn't done what you think he should have, even though I am unsure what exactly you think he should have done, but in any case I don't know his mind and as such cannot explain his (in)actions.
In any case let's list a couple of arguments
- People can have ideas, even really good ones, and simply tell them to the world and do no more. It would be a poorer world were this not the case.
- Musk might not have the ability to fund it himself, and that is fine.
- He may believe the best way to get the hyperloop into existence is through other companies pursuing it (which is already happening)
- He may believe that the main thing holding back the industry is technical workers, in which case a student competition is well placed to produce more of them.
- He may believe that the main thing holding back the hyperloop is building above ground tunnels with the logistical issues that holds. He is attempting to reduce the cost of building below ground tunnels.
So honestly, what are you trying to argue here? Is it that you can't judge an idea without also judging the actions of anyone associated with that idea? Is it that you can't tell people about an idea without also acting on that idea yourself? Is it that you don't like Musk and you don't want anyone else to like hime either, or perhaps that you don't like the fanboys and wish they would shut up? Maybe it's something else, but in any case I still don't see the relevance to mars.
Sorry I wasn't clear; I was hoping you had more to add in support of your position.
I believe your argument, to use your words, has been that "this Elon Musk character is [not] genuine" and that "his intentions are [not] really taking human beings to mars". Your reasoning to come to this outcome is "what happened with Hyperloop". After he "threw some ideas" he apparently "disappeared from the picture" and didn't even bother to invest in it by "[attempting] to build a prototype"!!
That is, you have no argument against going to mars, only that you think Musk is not genuine in his intent. Even if Musk dropped the ball on hyperloop (and I am not judging if he has) that doesn't imply that hyperloop is a bad idea.
Furthermore, your argument for why we should mistrust him is because, apparently, having ideas is a bad thing (unless you also spend an appropriate amount of your time and money on all of your ideas).
I think these are deeply flawed arguments, and so I expanded on them further up the chain, in the hope that you might have something more substantial behind them.
No. Having "ideas" that are solely meant for generating publicity and attract investors money is a bad thing.
>you have no argument against going to mars, only that you think Musk is not genuine in his intent.
I have argument against spending huge amount of money in the name of Mars colonization. I also think Musk is not genuine in his intent, and this "idea" is solely meant to rise his and his companies good will among the technically inclined but gullible crowd (which transforms into more investments) ...
I agree that overselling ideas, with the intent of duping people, is a bad thing. Be it snake oil or a piece of technology that can't actually change the world, there are a lot of ways to mislead people into parting with their cash.
I also think that Musk et al do tend to be overly optimistic about what they can deliver. Falcon Heavy has been 6 months away for a few years now.
I will even agree that not a lot has yet come from hyperloop despite the large amount of playtime the idea got, especially here on HN (unlike all the other ideas that are popular here).
The hyperloop and a mission to mars are both big dreams (of quite different scales though) and they do seem to raise "his and his companies good will among the technically inclined".
The thing is no matter how great those dreams are, when you're chasing the minds of the technically inclined there's nothing more convincing than success. Plenty of people have planned to go to mars, but not many of them have launched a rocket and landed it on a barge. You can go out today and by a fully electric car, and charge it with a solar roof built to look like roof tiles.
Perhaps these successes are just part of a long con though. It's possible that Musk had planned this all out in 2001 when he was first talking about "Mars Oasis", but that seems incredibly unlikely. Whenever Gwynne Shotwell (President/COO SpaceX) has spoken of their mission, mars is there. Every iteration of the rockets has been talked about as the next step to mars. Their plans may be flawed or their funding inadequate, but the actions and words of SpaceX show that they truly are trying to get to mars. Your "gullible crowd" wouldn't be half as excited otherwise.
Put that aside for a second.
Spending a large amount of money just to colonise mars may be a bad idea. From what I can tell so far SpaceX is managing to raise funds to cover R&D costs fairly well, by providing a useful launch service. There is meant to be an announcement about how mars will be funded soon, so I'm waiting to see that. Ideally the bulk of the costs will be born in infrastructure that has commercial uses outside of just going to mars and will be able to pay for themselves, just as the current rockets are funding re-usability research.
Lastly, I'd like to ask what you think Musk's real intent is? Say that he wasn't genuine, that all of this is a ruse, what do you think the end game is? My only real guess here is that by building good will or fervour among clients and potential employees you can sustain higher employee/customer churn rates. The thing is, it seems like customers are genuinely happy with the products they are receiving, be it orbital launches or electric cars etc. and the employees I've heard speak are genuinely excited to be working on the problems they work on.
Musk is doing a great job of aiming for mars, and even if he misses he sure looks like he'll get close.
>not many of them have launched a rocket and landed it on a barge...
Are you saying this was something thought to be impossible before?
>I'd like to ask what you think Musk's real intent is?
Spacex is a space transportation company. Its business is getting things into space. The more it's reach, the better. Right? So ultimately they might get to mars.
It is a business target. But the problem is that it is now being painted as a mission to save humanity. As a business, spacex wants to reach there as soon as possible, but for humanity, there is no urgent need to go to mars or anywhere. And what Musk is doing is creating a boogeyman of a "catastrophe" and generate fear and proclaim himself as a savior that could save us all.
And this generates a lot of good will, which translate to a lot of funding. Imagine asking for funds by saying you want to run a business mining asteroids. It will get a lot less funding than a project to "save humanity. So basically, these funding is based on generated fear, funds that could have put to a better use right here and now....
>Musk is doing a great job of aiming for mars, and even if he misses he sure looks like he'll get close.
Note that aiming for a business of asteroid mining or aiming to get things further into space generally will look a lot like aiming for mars. I mean, they can milk this cow as long as possible, because they are not really promising the investors that they will colonize Mars, right. It is just good will based on their "ambitions". They can discard the colonization idea, just like they did with Hyperloop, and the people will forget it just as easily....
>It is not relevant to the idea of going to mars. But it is relevant when considering the credibility of the person who is proposing this idea.
The idea either holds weight or does not.
If there were evidence of Musk, for example, raising money for a hyperloop and then stealing all of it I would say - "don't give this man money, for he will steal it all!" - but I still would not have discussed plans of going to mars.
> I am not upset about anything.
Upset was perhaps a poor choice; what I mean is, what is it about the hyperloop that brings you to raise it as a point so many times. It seems as though you feel something shady or untoward has been done, and I am wondering what that is.
> If Elon Musk thought the idea could work, why would not he pursue it himself, or if he is too busy, why not at least fund a prototype (you don't seriously consider the "student competition" to be in the same league, right?) Do you have a straight answer to this question?
First, why would you even think I should have an answer to this question?
I can think of a few reasons why Musk hasn't done what you think he should have, even though I am unsure what exactly you think he should have done, but in any case I don't know his mind and as such cannot explain his (in)actions.
In any case let's list a couple of arguments
- People can have ideas, even really good ones, and simply tell them to the world and do no more. It would be a poorer world were this not the case.
- Musk might not have the ability to fund it himself, and that is fine.
- He may believe the best way to get the hyperloop into existence is through other companies pursuing it (which is already happening)
- He may believe that the main thing holding back the industry is technical workers, in which case a student competition is well placed to produce more of them.
- He may believe that the main thing holding back the hyperloop is building above ground tunnels with the logistical issues that holds. He is attempting to reduce the cost of building below ground tunnels.
So honestly, what are you trying to argue here? Is it that you can't judge an idea without also judging the actions of anyone associated with that idea? Is it that you can't tell people about an idea without also acting on that idea yourself? Is it that you don't like Musk and you don't want anyone else to like hime either, or perhaps that you don't like the fanboys and wish they would shut up? Maybe it's something else, but in any case I still don't see the relevance to mars.