How the U.S. government came to rely on the tech billionaire—and is now struggling to rein him in.
  • Uniquitous@lemmy.oneEnglish
    301·
    11 months ago

    If SpaceX is that critical to national defense & foreign policy, it should be nationalized.

    • andrew@lemmy.stuart.funEnglish
      92·
      11 months ago

      I mean, we didn’t nationalize Lockheed-Martin or Boeing or Northrop-Grumman or Raytheon or General Dynamics. I think we can survive without nationalizing the company as we’ve done throughout our defense history.

      • Uniquitous@lemmy.oneEnglish
        14·
        11 months ago

        Those companies had boards of directors and people at the top who were known to be reliable partners. SpaceX has an idiotic juvenile at the helm. The situations are barely even comparable.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.worldEnglish
          6·
          11 months ago

          Those companies had boards of directors and people at the top who were known to be reliable partners. SpaceX has an idiotic juvenile at the helm. The situations are barely even comparable.

          Not a student of history I take it? I give you Howard Hughes.

        • HollandJim@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          11 months ago

          SpaceX and Tesla now have effective senior management that insulate their divisions from Musk. His impact there is increasingly minimal, if at all present.

          Where Musk is allowed to be Musk is Twitter, an emblem of his wonderful management style.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.comEnglish
        41·
        11 months ago

        None of those companies had the ability to stop their equipment in the field from working if they decided one day they’d rather support our enemies. And they didn’t have a history of being influenced by our enemies.

        The article makes it clear that Musk has already gotten Ukrainian soldiers killed with his shenanigans. We should not allow him the chance to do it again.

      • hglman@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        11 months ago

        Its unclear that we are surviving them, or at least not paying them blood money too.

    • LazaroFilm@lemmy.worldEnglish
      72·
      11 months ago

      Nationalizing SpaceX would turn it into nowadays NASA’s system which is risk zero and the expense of pushing the envelope and fast changes. SpaceX doesn’t mind blowing up 10 rockets while nasa will spend years to design one and launch it once.

      • Uniquitous@lemmy.oneEnglish
        12·
        11 months ago

        It doesn’t behoove us to have one man be capable of derailing entire segments of our national policy at his whim, especially when that man was never elected to anything.

      • MotoAsh@lemmy.worldEnglish
        8·
        11 months ago

        It’s not like they’d HAVE to continue with the same policy.

        B’sides, at least NASA doesn’t blow up a launch pad within a nature preserve just to stay on schedule…

        • ripcord@kbin.social
          1·
          11 months ago

          What makes you say that?

          I mean, Elon, sure, but did the company overall do something I missed…?

          • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.worldEnglish
            13·
            11 months ago

            Their way of working. It is like a software shop, for example the “fail fast” principle.

            This seems disruptive in the world of engineering, and it has caused many people wonder. But it is not the best way if you suddenly have living people sitting in the rockets.

  • Snapz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    14·
    11 months ago

    Musk told Kahl that the vivid illustration of how technology he had designed for peaceful ends was being used to wage war gave him pause.

    Well you see, there’s you’re problem right there… You’re completely full of shit. Musk has never designed anything.