malmo wrote:
"You can tell it's real because it looked so fake. CGI is better than this." -- Elon Musk 7:30 into the video.
Pretty standard obfuscation technique from psy-ops these days.
For at least the last 20 years geopolitical actors have been able to fake anything, but recently the basement technologists have caught up - so now they go to "fuzzing" the CGI to make it look more "real" to the uninitiated.
Not buying it wrote:
They look fake. Please explain how a rocket can come back to earth and land upright.
These rocket landing are further proof that the Earth is FLAT!
Update! Tesla car off course and will not reach Mars but drift aimless into asteroid belt. Another mission FAILURE.
) lost rocket booster
) no air to hear David Bowie
) missed Mars
Some people at work literally hero worship this guy. I don't get it. "The ego has landed".
Hero worship wrote:
"The ego has landed".
Actually, it just took off.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Update! Tesla car off course and will not reach Mars but drift aimless into asteroid belt. Another mission FAILURE.
) lost rocket booster
) no air to hear David Bowie
) missed Mars
You forgot
) No people to hear David Bowie
Hero worship wrote:
Some people at work literally hero worship this guy. I don't get it. "The ego has landed".
Through my obscure line of work, I've collaborated with Musk quite a few times over the last 7 years in various small projects, both in person as well as through phone/email. Were you to actually interact with him on a one to one basis, you'd quickly see he has anything but a huge ego. He's actually a very kind and somewhat quiet man. It's easy to surmise a man or woman's character from the way that they treat their employees, she suffuce to say that he's as cordial and forgiving as they come. As an aside, he's by far and away the most brilliant man that I've ever been privileged to work with- that coming from an undergrad at MIT and phd from Cal Tech.
Sunnyvale, CA wrote:
Hero worship wrote:
Some people at work literally hero worship this guy. I don't get it. "The ego has landed".
Through my obscure line of work, I've collaborated with Musk quite a few times over the last 7 years in various small projects, both in person as well as through phone/email. Were you to actually interact with him on a one to one basis, you'd quickly see he has anything but a huge ego. He's actually a very kind and somewhat quiet man. It's easy to surmise a man or woman's character from the way that they treat their employees, she suffuce to say that he's as cordial and forgiving as they come. As an aside, he's by far and away the most brilliant man that I've ever been privileged to work with- that coming from an undergrad at MIT and phd from Cal Tech.
*suffice
Before Musk there was Miller.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdmOH8bDBF4&feature=youtu.be
Not buying it wrote:
They look fake. Please explain how a rocket can come back to earth and land upright.
Well in summary, when the boosters separate from the rocket, four fins first fold out from the booster which help to steer it via air drag once the boosters are at a low enough altitude for there to be significant air resistance. Then a series of very precise rocket engine burns controlled by finely tuned electronic systems and mathematical calculations slow the booster as it falls and direct it to the landing pad. Although I'm not sure of the exact details of the system, I know that radar signals from the landing site combined with the rocket's onboard sensors which measure its movement and engine performance are what provide the feedback that allow the booster to calculate the right fin movements and rocket burns to bring it to the right location in the upright position.
It took a long time and a lot of hard work to perfect the system, and there were of course many failures before they were able to make it work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvim4rsNHkQHave to hand it to them for taking such a crazy idea that sounds completely impractical, and making it into a working practical system.
It took a long time and a lot of hard work to perfect the system,
Be objective. Was this 100% successful? 100% perfection?
and making it into a working practical system.
Perfect and working practical system? Do you work for them?
#1) The car is going to an asteroid field instead of it's planned destination.
#2) They lost one rocket.
NASA got the Mars rovers there. First try. Sure the rover had over problems, but they didn't launch it to deep space! This was an epic failure and only fan-boys are pumping it up.
Sunnyvale, CA wrote:
he's by far and away the most brilliant man that I've ever been privileged to work with
why does he think putting massive amounts of electricity, which is mostly generated from fossil fuels and will be even more so if its consumption dramatically increases, into inherently-inefficient battery systems is an ecologically sound project?
On the contrary, if people believe his cars are actually reducing emissions simply because they no longer occur at end-use of the product, they will start driving more. The same thing happened with fuel-efficient small cars in the 70's and 80's. The problem is the consumption itself, the luxuries, the civilization, the fancy toys. It will always create unacceptable pollution.
Student of the Human Condition wrote:
Is it a dummy? Have all his ex-wives and girlfriends been accounted for?
For years, I've smelled a sociopath here--what's the best way to hide something--right out in the open.
Ha ha. Never thought of that angle.
Are you in the 94087 or in a crappier part of Sunnyvale?
Was it so perfect? wrote:
It took a long time and a lot of hard work to perfect the system,
Be objective. Was this 100% successful? 100% perfection?
and making it into a working practical system.
Perfect and working practical system? Do you work for them?
#1) The car is going to an asteroid field instead of it's planned destination.
#2) They lost one rocket.
NASA got the Mars rovers there. First try. Sure the rover had over problems, but they didn't launch it to deep space! This was an epic failure and only fan-boys are pumping it up.
ok so mr musk is super al gore save the planet blah blah blah....so let me ask all you left leaning morans who support him why havent you thought of these points
1) lithium mining is ONE of if not the WORST things environmentally you can do, why is it ok to poison the planet to make overpriced cars for the 1%?
2) on that note, why is it sooooo cool that he launched one of his moran overpriced cars into space? tell me why that is so f*cking cool? is it just the shell or did he launch a fully functional tesla up there, lithium battery and all? was it built in a "clean room" or in his factory? i mean come on! save this planent blah blah blah but lets launch an ego driven CAR into space and who cares what extraterrestrial environment we contaminate.
so its ok for rich dudes to pollute outer space as long as they preach green engery on this planet? what microbs and bacteria did he launch up into space with his car? is there any consideration that maybe that lithium battery could be TOXIC to some alien planet or life form?
but but but he voted for the left he really cares!
On another note, why don't ANY of these billionaires put their money towards something useful. It's 2018, and there's no cure for cancer or malaria.
Was it so perfect? wrote:
It took a long time and a lot of hard work to perfect the system,
Be objective. Was this 100% successful? 100% perfection?
and making it into a working practical system.
Perfect and working practical system? Do you work for them?
#1) The car is going to an asteroid field instead of it's planned destination.
#2) They lost one rocket.
NASA got the Mars rovers there. First try. Sure the rover had over problems, but they didn't launch it to deep space! This was an epic failure and only fan-boys are pumping it up.
The Tesla was just a cool looking piece of dead weight. An actual spacecraft, like what NASA has already sent to Mars, would have the ability to make midcourse corrections to reach its destination. Even Apollo craft had to make midcourse correction burns after separating from the 3rd stage of Saturn V to reach the Moon and the moon is much closer that Mars.
The test of the Falcon Heavy launch vehicle was a success. For you and Wiggins to call it a failure is absurd.
Big-time post... big-time post.
Bad Wigins wrote:
Sunnyvale, CA wrote:
he's by far and away the most brilliant man that I've ever been privileged to work with
why does he think putting massive amounts of electricity, which is mostly generated from fossil fuels and will be even more so if its consumption dramatically increases, into inherently-inefficient battery systems is an ecologically sound project?
On the contrary, if people believe his cars are actually reducing emissions simply because they no longer occur at end-use of the product, they will start driving more. The same thing happened with fuel-efficient small cars in the 70's and 80's. The problem is the consumption itself, the luxuries, the civilization, the fancy toys. It will always create unacceptable pollution.
Was it so perfect? wrote:
It took a long time and a lot of hard work to perfect the system,
Be objective. Was this 100% successful? 100% perfection?
and making it into a working practical system.
Perfect and working practical system? Do you work for them?
#1) The car is going to an asteroid field instead of it's planned destination.
#2) They lost one rocket.
NASA got the Mars rovers there. First try. Sure the rover had over problems, but they didn't launch it to deep space! This was an epic failure and only fan-boys are pumping it up.
0/10