Comments by "Digital Nomad" (@digitalnomad9985) on "Hoog" channel.

@TrueGemuese "his "reusable" rockets have a tendency to explode when trying to reuse them." Falcon recently achieved a string of 200 launches without a mission failure. That is a world record. A tendency to explode compared to what?
3
@aowen2471 The Soviet Union got a lead on the US by STARTING FIRST. The were (secretly) serious before Sputnik, and the US had space on the back burner before the USSR gave them a shock.
2
@someguycalledcerberus9805 WW 1 was devastating primarily of HUMAN capitol, not of industrial and economic infrastructure as WW2 was. WW 1 plowed up farmland. WW2 leveled factories and cities.
1
ICBMs don't have the throw weight to orbit capacity of most commercial and space agency boosters. They have a common technological "ancestry", but they are a whole different animal. ICBM's don't need to launch 6 tons to LEO. The weapons buss weighs a lot less that that, and it is suborbital. Most SLBMs require even less delta-v than ICBMs, because submarines can launch on most land locations with a weapon that has about a 3000 mile range, by approaching the target stealthily underwater.
1
The market share bars tell the story. He's not trying to convince you. The interviewer asked him to EXPLAIN the ground truth, and that's what he's doing.
1
@chiptune_ Yes, the rural market is underserved with broadband, even in many developed countries like the US. Europe has a higher population density in most European countries than the US, so fiber to the home may make more sense there. Wiring the world would cost a great deal more than Starlink.
1
Cheaper depends on DISTANCE. Europe has more population density, so at least for interconnecting Europe (at least European cities), fiber is cheaper. Also, Starlink cannot replace ground connections for node-dense places like cities. Starlink is the cheapest way to bring broadband to rural areas and, eventually, to vehicles. Starlink will only have a few premium customers in each city who need the lower latency. (Lower because the high index of refraction in glass means that light travels slower in fiber.)
1
He is not swallowing the launch market with slick rhetoric. He is UNDERSELLING the competition.
1
@jansix4287 "make gold out of less valuable matter" Not without the Philosopher's Stone. Elemental transmutation is a laboratory curiosity that costs more in energy alone than any element is worth. Even at Apollo prices, you would spend many times NASA's heyday budget trying to create a mass of artificial elements of equal mass to the Moon rocks brought back by Apollo. You can't "exploit" workers, especially talented technicians, in a country where they have other employment opportunities and the government doesn't limit those opportunities. Musk may be demanding of his employees, but nobody is working for him that doesn't want to be there.
1