Positive users defend SpaceX for turning impossible sci-fi reusable rocketry into reality where prior efforts failed, while negative users call the 0-1 innovation standards insufferable and unrealistic.
Based on 5 visible X reactions from 9 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
@teortaxesTex what was the previous reusable space rocket paradigm that space x iterated off of? none. it was nasa/russian/chinese rockets that were single use only and made the space age cost-unfeasible
@teortaxesTex 0 to 1 people are insufferable. what do they expect china to invent warp drive even if they did it will not meet their 0 to 1. country was in begging condition 30 year ago btw.
@teortaxesTex “All he did was bring a concept that once only existed in sci fi and the entire rest of the industry had given up on as impossible to life.
@teortaxesTex @jeremykauffman this is like thinking a new form of garage door is more revolutionary than inventing the car
@teortaxesTex 把科幻变成现实本身就是一种绝无仅有的极致浪漫
honestly – how is SpaceX 0 to 1? It's standard chemistries, pieces of Apollo, and a lot of elbow grease. Elon's insight was just "wait, if propulsion landing as on every 1950s sci-fi novel cover works, that's… cost per kg…" Yet the Chinese systematically *don't* do this move https://x.com/teortaxesTex/status/2075533914051948842/photo/1 https://twitter.com/arcticinstincts/status/2075517055412146557
The cool thing about China is they don't have to choose. technologically, they will contain most of the global diversity. A dozen paradigms of rocketry, 3-5 EUV designs, 100 robot companies. It's fine. Enough people, enough ideas, enough energy and material. Triage is for poors https://twitter.com/apestein_dev/status/2075530084254204162
This iterative improvement is less iterative than Falcon-9, speaking of hardware design https://x.com/arcticinstincts/status/2075469858792460764?s=20
Positive users defend SpaceX for turning impossible sci-fi reusable rocketry into reality where prior efforts failed, while negative users call the 0-1 innovation standards insufferable and unrealistic.
Based on 5 visible X reactions from 9 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
honestly – how is SpaceX 0 to 1? It's standard chemistries, pieces of Apollo, and a lot of elbow grease. Elon's insight was just "wait, if propulsion landing as on every 1950s sci-fi novel cover works, that's… cost per kg…" Yet the Chinese systematically *don't* do this move https://x.com/teortaxesTex/status/2075533914051948842/photo/1 https://twitter.com/arcticinstincts/status/2075517055412146557