Today SpaceX landed a fucking booster rocket on a barge in the Atlantic after it launched a payload into orbit to go to the ISS
post things from reality that are /m/ as fuck
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pUAydjne5M&feature=youtu.be&t=35m48s
https://a.uguu.se/oikfgq.webm
Truly we are living in the future, lads.
This is the sort of think that gets cooked up at a for-profit space company. Nasa dumps their boosters because "lol tax money".
As a dude in astrophysics, I despise SpaceX, and really anything to do with Elon Musk.
Not for privatizing spaceshit (which is cool), but because they're ultimately running a scam, and they've helped to keep other companies from getting grant money that could be put to much better use.
>>14097990
How so?
>>14098116
High turnaround of employees, failure to deliver on extravagant promises.
This goes for Tesla as well.
There's also some more curiosities with SpaceX and likely bribes to cover up their errors. There's also a lot of Musk's money that flows into campaign coffers and allegations of money laundering.
>>14098180
>citation needed
>>14098180
> High turnaround of employees, failure to deliver on extravagant promises.
Neither of those make a company a scam. Hell, they sound like business as normal for most large companies. And Governments. He might be giving bribes and laundering money (no idea), but those first two things are rather generic and completely innocent.
>>14097934
http://www.businessinsider.com/alphabet-owned-schaft-just-showed-off-its-latest-robot-2016-4
>Schaft
>>14098180
>failure to deliver on extravagant promises.
You mean like landing a booster? They just did.
>This goes for Tesla as well.
How didn't Tesla deliver? His cars have very high ratings and the best auto pilot of any mainstream car right now.
Affordable electric car that isn't horse shit coming as well in a year.
I'm no Musk fanboy. But maybe the Musk haters should realize that he isn't so bad and that there are companies out there that get millions more in tax dollars and produce even less.
You don't have to hate something because reddit likes it. That's tribalism .
>>14098193
http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/08/12/spacex-faces-lawsuit-pay-working-conditions/
>>14097990
>>14098180
They literally just landed a booster rocket onto a drone barge in the middle of the Atlantic ocean.
Your argument is invalid.
>>14098318
Since when was this their only project?
>>14098180
Could you explain why Teslas are shit and not meeting expectations? I've been really interested in them but I'm too poor to realistically see them from a consumer standpoint.
Let be bring the thread back on track.
50s-60s had some interesting IRL work in mecha
>>14098180
haha ok
>>14097990
>they're evil and corrupt
Let's assume I agree wholeheartedly with you here. They're currently getting results and doing great new shit, which is more than I can say for every other evil and corrupt business whose only accomplishments are increasing shareholder value.
So Musk expects his employees to work 30 hours a day. They do that in accounting firms in Japan, but I don't see those fucks landing rockets on roboships.
>>14098214
https://a.pomf.cat/blpixk.mp3
>>14098413
>They do that in accounting firms in Japan
Well, that's also one reason the suicide rates in Japan are so high, from what I understand. In the long run, it's not really a good thing for the advancement of science as a whole if the best and brightest engineers and scientists are driven to burnout--or worse--because they're horribly overworked under Musk.
>>14098439
52% of STEM graduates in the US don't go into a STEM field. If we can use them up and discard them in a few years, we can replace them with the poor sods who would have ordinarily gone into some less-useful field for lack of job opportunities.
SCIENCE AIN'T FREE, THE MARCH OF PROGRESS GOTTA BE LITTERD WITH THE BLOOD OF ENGINERS. THOMAS "ASSHOLE" EDISON AKA DIMBULB IS NOT MY INVENTOR. HE IS CHINESE INDUSTRALIST AND PROBABLY JEW AS WELL :DD praise tesla
>>14098214
>Although Google is selling Boston Dynamics to distance itself from "terrifying" humanoid robots
What? I could see them not being profitable for a while. But the humanoid ones are pretty cute, they don't have human faces or anything.
>>14097990
>>14098180
Spic detected.
>>14098464
lol
Seriously though, one reason a lot of STEM folks don't go into STEM fields is because they've heard horror stories about the hours and conditions in a lot of STEM-related jobs. Stories about harsh employers like Musk might make them even less likely to join up.
>>14098555
Boo hoo.
>>14097934
That is cool as fuck
>>14097990
I hope Britbong SSTO tech can BTFO SpaceX
>>14097970
SpaceX is getting a lot of grant money.
>>14097990
I know what you mean, I am impressed by the technical aspect of the Falcon 9 and the project but I don't think they'll actually make a saving and I'm horrified well hand-out space to a private venture.
But I'm biased, I've got more hope in rocket-plane project like Skylon.
At least we can say that it is a work toward reusable spacecraft and less space debris (thought the Falcon 9 fly too low to keep anything dangerous up there)
>>14098471
http://www.techinsider.io/google-distances-itself-from-terrifying-boston-dynamics-robots-2016-3
Google literally sold it because normies got scared and butthurt from watching too much terminator.
>[child] B-but why is Atlas bad, mommy?
>[Uneducated white trash parent] It's unsettling. It wasn't made to be, honey. It scares people, so we should be scared of it.
>What if it replaces m-muh job, despite the fact that I am a waitress and a fucking vending machine from 500 AD could have replaced me. But no, people want HUMANs in the service sector, thus rendering the entire argument invalid.
Retards, I swear
>>14100575
until we have large scale social changes regarding wealth and providing necessaries to people, automation is just going to destroy the jobs worked by poor people and leave them destitute. sure it'd be great to have robots do every factory job and serve us food, but if there isn't corresponding social change to make sure all the factory workers, waitresses, etc have other roles to fill and have a way to earn or maintain a livelihood it's scary shit man.
>>14098555
Well usually being paid massive salaries should reward said working conditions.
>>14100465
>I'm horrified well hand-out space to a private venture.
why
>>14100575
Why are engineers always such self important faggots?
>>14100589
You don't need massive social changes, because that shit is inevitable. Thise same robots need making and upkeep, and there are always lots if other new jobs in other fields too regardless. The people out of a job either need to learn new skills or take a step down. It's a lot more organic a method than changing society to accommodate those people. Doing that would hold society back a lot too, since it would necessitate giving them obsolete jobs. And funding obsolete work to hire them. It's shitty if you're out of a job, but life isn't fair and they have to reskill to contribute., so tough I guess.
>>14100594
Because when's the last time YOU made anything, plebian?
>>14100618
I was doing some welding just yesterday and I sketch regularly
My roommate is on a Hyperloop design team that's going to California to test their design this summer. Praise Musk.
>>14100630
>welding
good, now make it move.
>>14100611
>don't need massive social changes to deal with an inevitable massive social change
>just get a new job in the future economy!
yeah but that ignores the major structural barriers to learning important skills necessary for such jobs. you think someone who works retail or fast food can expect to walk in to the robot factory and get on the job training in robot maintenance? or take the time they don't have and spend the money they don't have to go back to college?
it more than just sucks for them, it sucks for society at large because there are going to be far more jobs replaced by robots than there will be jobs repairing said robots. it's not like people will be manufacturing said robots at any rate. if you let the majority of the service and manufacturing sector get replaced by robots and you just say "tough" to the people who you fire you will have a lot of people rioting in the streets.
i don't think we need to keep obsolete jobs around forever, but it's plain irresponsible and idiotic to assume that replacing low skill workers with robots in the very near term won't result in major social disruptions that don't need to be addressed.
>>14098396
My inevitable death will prove only one thing. No matter what, I exist!
>>14097990
>astrophysics
d r o p p e d
>>14100695
it has a nice improvised look to it, like someone took a backhoe and put it together in a cool way
like 50 years from now, society has collapsed, and giant robots made from scavenged parts battle for dominance.
>>14100594
everybody's a self-important faggot
>>14100704
now that's a future I can believe in
>>14097934
Oh hey, this one didn't didn't blow up.
>>14100704
They should make a movie.
>>14100728
do you think a guy at the controls of that thing has even just thought long and hard about goin hog wild with it
Just pulling a Killdozer 2.0
>>14100737
https://youtu.be/l4UFQWKjy_I
>>14100704
>painted on rust
>good look
if they want it to look rusty and used they should fucking use it
>>14100737
i'm sure it has an external power source that could easily be turned off
r-right?
>>14100747
people paint rust and wear onto their models, and this is basically a giant model for manchildren so i don't really see a difference.
>>14100737
>do you think a guy at the controls of that thing has even just thought long and hard about goin hog wild with it
>Just pulling a Killdozer 2.0
I'd sure be tempted.
>>14100690
And yet despite massive changes in technology and society several times in the last century unemployment is never cumulative and is in fact lower now in most places than it has been and pretty average for that century. Because while there are barriers to education, people get past them constantly. No, you can't get on the job training for some jobs. So what? They're jobs that require specialisation and education. And even older people regularly get them.
>>14100765
ah, to be in that logging machine and blasting this from the horn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSdkMrMLiR8
>>14100811
>Because while there are barriers to education, people get past them constantly.
I guarantee you that for every one person who does, thousands are wrongly forced to forego education to take care of family, etc
>>14098464
>52% of STEM graduates in the US don't go into a STEM field.
The h1b visa program has a bit to do with that.
>>14100575
>being afraid of small robots that can only lift 15 pounds
Do they not know that BD is mostly doing this stuff for DARPA? It is for the fucking military, not the civilian job sector. Plus we don't need robots to take certain jobs, there is already self checkouts at stores too.
>>14100977
wow it's like people are really fucking stupid or something
>>14100820
I guarantee that even if that's true that society marches on and survives regardless. That it's been true in the past and will continue to be so in future. It definitely sucks for them, but time marches on and so does society. On the backs and labor of new employees fresh from education and school if nothing else.
Like, I heard people talking about how England's last steel mill was about to be closed last week and the government wanted to save it because of all the secondary jobs it served in the area, like food and so on as well as no longer having a steel industry. And yea, it definitely is a hit and I feel bad for the people affected, but at the same time I'm just thinking they'll have to let it go at some point, and no matter when they do there'll be lots of people affected. That Britain doesn't need to make it's own steel, but does have job specialization in healthcare, IT and other sectors and people need to look to the future and not the past, because the past will only hold them back.
People almost certainly had the same complaints in the 1800s when child labor was the big concern and kids could be employed at a fraction of the cost of an adult, while adults couldn't compete traditionally and had to reskill, with mills and such closing due to new labor practices and technology. And yet society survived because new industries came along, new jobs, new technology and people educated themselves on those or made new contributions and inventions. And the same will always happen.
I'd rather have that then hold up all of society to keep obsolete jobs secure for the sake of nostalgia personally.
>>14100690
>
i don't think we need to keep obsolete jobs around forever, but it's plain irresponsible and idiotic to assume that replacing low skill workers with robots in the very near term won't result in major social disruptions that don't need to be addressed.
You're exactly right. I think there have been examples of societies successfully managing these sorts of employment shifts, or at least managing them more successfully than worst-case scenarios might attest. For instance, America's GI Bill after WWII allowed a lot of returning soldiers (who otherwise might not have gotten good educations) to attend college, thus vastly expanding the numbers of skilled engineers, technicians, and other science/technology experts the new post-war economy relied on, while simultaneously allowing vastly higher numbers of people to get the jobs a new middle/upper class life required. But we'd have to have a similar mass education/job training program today to keep up with the effects of automation, and that might be a harder sell politically.
>>14100866
Even every single mean foreigners coming in and tucking our jerbs via H1B went for a STEM job, that doesn't even account for a quarter of the STEM positions our graduates don't want to take.
funny how a sub-debate about job-replacement-by-robot appeared.
Just wanted to say I have a very pessimist view on this.
For every 1000 jobs made obsolete by robot you'll only hire 1 "robotist" and the saving will not be enough for the 1000 to keep affording the service it provided.
That's edgy 1% for you but we are creating a world for the rich owner of robot to live in, "pruning too slowly" the filthy uneducated peasant who couldn't justify their worth.
Afraid we'll have to rework how private property work in the future and it will surely be bloody.
>>14100575
>>14100575
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-innovation-idUSKCN0W421V
The pentagon must be normies watching too much terminator as well.
>>14098214
>those legs
>>14102668
1 ronotist? People don't really believe this, do they? Robots need so many skills it's ridiculous. Everyone from the programmers to the designers to the machinists to the assembly-line workers will always have a job making those robots. You want to make robots to make robots? Those need electricians, software engineers/debuggers, hardware specialists and repairmen to keep functioning, just like the robots that robot makes.
And robots can't replace 1000 jobs. You replace 7 or 8 per robot at best in most positions. Robots cut down on jobs but not as many as you'd think. The sectors just move.
For a mecha board you guys sure dont know shit about robots. Do you forget about all those people in the hangar? All the Tem Rays and Dr. Kabutos? All the upgrades and software updates they'll always get?
>>14102668
>Afraid we'll have to rework how private property work in the future and it will surely be bloody.
How ling will the communism meme persist?
Jesus christ.
>>14102788
Communism is the deadliest meme of all time.
>>14102668
The world is getting richer, not poorer. Statistical evidence show the world's poor are getting richer, and absolute poverty is shrinking and has been for decades. It's part of a centuries long trend with money spreading. Were not all going to dissappear, because we're more likely statistically to get rich, not poor.
>>14102668
I do think some countries will have to adopt basic income at some point.
>>14102784
> 1 ronotist? People don't really believe this, do they? Robots need so many skills it's ridiculous.
This is a logic inherited from the past before automatism (believe it or not the actual infrastructure in use is 10years behind what is introduced on the market), and before MASSIVE standardization as well.
Not to forget how a few megacorporation are monopolizing their market.
You now longer have 100 teams engineers working on the same stuff, you now have one team of engineer and barely more technicians to deal with trouble&shooting.
> And robots can't replace 1000 jobs.
Of course they can, and did, it all depend of the job and our definition of a robot job. Nowadays we have service on our apps that would have required BILLIONS of workers if they were done "manually". Even in technical job CAD put out of a job millions of people.
The error is to believe there is a way to progress without automatizing and taking human-error out of the loop.
And it doesn't help that /m/ grew up on single-pilot Mech and single-engineer designer.
>>14102788
> I think only communism exist
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative#Comparison_with_other_work_organizations
jeezzz, sometime I wonder if communism only existed to become a scarecrow / though-terminating-cliché to prevent any change.
>>14103346
This. Wealth and standard of living are increasing across the board. Sure, they're increasing faster for the rich than for the poor, but they're still increasing for all demographics.
>>14103346
This logic is flawed.
It doesn't matter if 9 Billions persons are Overall richer, if one have 99.99999999% of the wealth while the rest have been reduced to organic automaton with great healthcare but no freedom or power of decision of any kind.
(The situation described above is not hypothetical)
It's also like saying "Once everybody is immortal, everyone will (technically) have the potential to become the next techno-god at some point in the future so we shouldn't strive toward equality anymore"
>>14103395
Yeah, but those country could only afford that if megacorporation actually paid their taxes.
> inb4 "there shouldn't be any taxes ! Ayn Rand is right !"or Andrew Ryan
Politic aside, someone have news on the Robonauts program ? How it fare ?
>>14103424
>those legs
SPIDERBOTS SOON
>>14103424
Except the amount of actually rich people is expanding too. Much slower than the amount of poor people is shrinking, but it's still growing, not shrinking. Not to mention that the world's rich are constantly shuffling. So the richest families now are much different to the richest families 100 or even 50 years ago. A lot of the world's biggest companies a few decades ago are now dead and gone, because they're obsolete.
>>14098309
>http://www.parabolicarc.com/2014/08/12/spacex-faces-lawsuit-pay-working-conditions/
Okay that was over two years ago.
>>14103457
As an example of this, the richest sportsperson in history isn't currently alive, nor were they recently. It's a Roman charioteer named Gaius Appuleius Diocles who was probably illiterate (and thus started poor) whose winnings alone dwarf any current athlete's net worth. He earned an estimated $15 Billion dollars in winnings (adjusted for today's money, but based on standard earnings of soldiers then and now), where today's top athlete's don't earn anywhere close even with endorsements.
Even the world's richest athlete, Ion Tirac, worth an estimated $2 billion isn't close, and he earned most of it from business ventures.
You also have things like Fortune 500 companies going out of business or falling away because new technologies make them obsolete or no longer important. The Fortune 500 in 1955 is much different than it is today and most of the biggest companies now weren't even around then. (http://www.aei.org/publication/fortune-500-firms-in-1955-vs-2014-89-are-gone-and-were-all-better-off-because-of-that-dynamic-creative-destruction/) Technology isn't going to stop and neither will people making money off it. Sure,it'll only ever be a tiny amount making the big bucks, but that tiny amount will run the former big money out of business and keep the market fresh.
>>14103533
>It's a Roman charioteer named Gaius Appuleius Diocles
he even sounds like a Roman Nascar name
>>14098464
finance takes in a lot of STEM people. they need people that are good at math to find new ways to sucking the money out of their investors.
>>14103346
>Statistical evidence show the world's poor are getting richer
Where is it
>>14103457
You didn't understand the "99%" conundrum did you ?
Say before you had 1 person 10x richer than 100,
If now you have 2 persons 100x richer than 200,
Then it is a loss for humanity as a whole (since said wealth increase did not come from the effort/luck of one individual but the combined effort of all other)
And the reason inequality is bad, is that due to how "current" private property work it interfere with Democracy and freedom of choices.
Technology won't stop progressing, but it doesn't mean we have to let a minority control it. We are fooled by how much "freedom" we have on the internet and taking it for granted. It's not, someday you might stop owning your own PC without realizing it.
>>14104027
I understand and have posted that it's not true, but you don't seem to get that I don't agree that it is. Like, the richest people in history are long dead, going by how rich those people are compared to their average citizen. Democracy doesn't work, but changing how rich citizens are won't fix that, because you'll still have career politicians looking to secure position.
>>14104027
Ah fuck, I meant to write "100" again, not 200, it make the whole thing wrong.
>>14104039
I got that you disagree, the complexity of your answer was a giveway. I was just being "4chan mockingbird" in that recognizing this FACT, and its status as a problem, is a prerequisite to solving the problem.
Still think your logic is flawed. From what I can tell you are assuming the system can't/mustn't change. Career politician are simply artifacts.
>>14104044
>NASA
>GM
>Dubs
Das it mean.....
>>14104071
Why is my logic flawed though? All you've done is come in and basically go "Rich people, grrrrr...right?" and then list of a few hypothetical things and call it a day. Statistical evidence says you're wrong. The are less poor people, more rich people and the degree to which rich people are rich compared to average is shrinking over historical examples. Add to that that richness usually only lasts a generation or two and I don't think it's nearly the problem you're making out. You've yet to show that the number of rich people and their richness is increasing, yet to say what freedom's we're giving up, yet to say anything except that these things could happen. Which, duh I guess. That doesn't mean they are.
Also, no, career politicians are not simply a given and inescapable. There are some systems like Sortician that don't have them (and in fact, specifically work not to). The ancient Greeks who invented democracy thought the idea of a career politician abhorrent and came up with that system specifically to stop it.
>>14104201
>Statistical evidence says you're wrong
Where is it
>>14104201
I think it would be faster to ask you what you consider the best marker of progress for humanity, because it look pretty alien to me.
I can only say your statistic certainly don't mean what you think they mean, but frankly I don't even feel like checking your sources considering how much data already show as a COMMON FACT the increasing disparity between rich and poor, wealth inequality and so on.
Since it's a fact, it strike that you simply don't recognize it as a problem. Maybe you don't see the implication or you adhere to some sort of social Darwinism where richs simply must exist for the sake of existing "there must be riches". That's what suggest your logic about it lasting "one generation anyway". I wonder if immortality would change your opinion, or the question of merit and inheritance.
> You've yet to show that the number of rich people and their richness is increasing
You are the one saying >>14103457 / >>14103533 their numbers is increasing (implying the inequality is shrinking). But they are actually less of them (proportionally to world's population) and they keep getting richer.
A king from the middle-age had less power than Bill Gate do now.
googled in 5s : http://inequality.org/wealth-inequality/
I said Career politician are an artifact because they have no influence on the problem. Getting rid of them isn't the goal and have no reason to be. I don't mind discussing alternate form of government but so far only striving toward a more participative democratic system is ethical, not to say about free-market.
Anyway, if we are going to talk about /pol/emic stuffs let's post /m/ picture at last.
>>14104405
> https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen?language=en
That's a pretty good start. I can't recall if it's all in that video or not, but his statistics videos usually have them so if not check more of his stuff I guess. They should all be on the TED site.
>>14104474
Maybe I should have been clearer there: I wanted you to show that the richness of a small group is increasing if that makes it clearer, since you claimed that the problem wasn't that some people are richer, but that only .00000001% (or something like it) could hold the majority of the wealth while everyone else was richer but still powerless.
Also, I'd disagree that a middle ages king would have less power than Bill Gates and that his power is only relatively large because he's living in a global economy. Kings in the middle ages had access to lots of shit the average person didn't, way more leisure time than average, slaves and so on. The disparity between that king and his subjects was way larger in my opinion than between Gates and the average US citizen. I don't know why you linked that page like it proved any of that assertion, because it doesn't.
I suggested getting rid of politicians because it's a pipe dream that has a low but better chance of happening than getting rid of the wealth divide in my opinion. Plus, I think career politicians serve big money as a means to secure wealth, influence and position. If that position was gone then one of the major reasons for them taking bribes would be gone and the system (government) would be better off, as would the society they serve. Getting rid of wealth is even more of a pipe dream in my opinion.
Also, if something is a COMMON FACT, then you should have no problem proving it.
>>14104527
We can't prove anything to someone who refuse the proof he's given. The Forbes 400 graph alone is saying everything. Now I'm betting you'll refuse a wikipedia link because wiki despite all the sources available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth
I watched the TED talk, pretty interesting stuff but it doesn't mean what you think it mean. The marker used is focused on household income, global GDP and child mortality rate. The 99% conundrum of who own how much simply wouldn't appear there, not on a video made to demonstrate something else entirely (the actual growth of the Third World)
What this video demonstrate is that less people die and they get closer to occident median income, things is, when you calculate an average it's normal that you do not see the individual disparity, even less if you focus over Income when you should be looking at Assets.
Anyway, to be frank I will drop the discussion because I don't think you understand the subject.
Just taking the end of your message :
A sortition system can only be used at place where representativity isn't a factor and the rules and objective clearly defined (such as in a Jury), this is in direct contradiction with the concept of representative democracy. Also, no one would risk to randomly put a Scientologist at a post with huge responsibility. Letting a system work through Chance don't make it more ethical.
Also, because bribery now come from outside the system, I wouldn't expect this to counter it, far from it.
As for "getting rid of wealth"...where the hell did you read that ? Wealth is just one of many marker that evaluate one's well-being. It's like you said "getting rid of happiness". The problem is that the wealth's (re)Distribution is pretty much horrible, redefining wealth would only change the marker.
>>14100590
>massive salaries
Yeah, too bad your dumbass supervisor/boss makes triple what you make and just sits in his office all day, only coming out to ask why your work isn't done :^)
I was talking to an old friend who works at Jefferson Labs, and apparently Raytheon is working on a 100kW free-electron laser (aka death ray), prototype expected 2018.
>>14102684
That is correct, yes.
>>14101838
They wont take them because they expect them to work h1-b hours and for h1b pay, this is what happens when you ignore labor
>>14098464
>>14098577
>>14100611
>>14100811
>>14101838
You retards are making it worse for everyone else
>>14097934
This just looks like reverse played.
The rocket actually took off, no?
>>14109468
Nope. It landed.
