Posted on 05/19/2018 7:47:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
During his sunset years, the great American inventor and entrepreneur Thomas Edison invested a great deal of time and energy in a project that he felt sure would be not just profitable, but essential for U.S. national security. Along with Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone, in the 1920s and 30s he sponsored botanical research into finding an alternative source of rubber. His reasoning was simple: at the time, rubber came from Europe's colonies in Africa and Asia, and from countries in Latin America. It was therefore possible that, in a major war, the U.S. could be cut off from foreign supplies of rubber, which was a critical resource for modern industry. Edison therefore labored night and day to identify a new source of rubber that could be grown on U.S. soil.
Edison succeeded. He determined that something akin to rubber could be derived from the Goldenrod plant. Unfortunately, however, his efforts were in vain. For one thing, the U.S. was never very likely to be cut off from foreign rubber, because it was Britain's Royal Navy that ruled the seas, and thus, unless the U.S. went to war with Britain, the rubber would continue to flow. More importantly, the Depression drove down the price of rubber, and, at almost the same moment that Edison settled on Goldenrod, another alternative source of rubber was discovered. The DuPont chemical company began to produce synthetic rubber. Not for the first time, Edison had come up short: he had produced an ingenious invention for which, unfortunately, the world had absolutely no need.
The story of Edison's misadventures with the Goldenrod plant demonstrate that even brilliant men – veritable wizards of technology – often get it wrong: they place their bets on the wrong lines of research, or they misconstrue what society needs or wants. Sadly, Elon Musk, the celebrated tech sector Wunderkind, is in serious danger of making the same mistake.
Musk is justly famous for his numerous initiatives aimed at pushing the envelope of technological innovation. Tesla, his company that produces electric cars, is beloved among the wealthy and eco-friendly, but Musk has struggled mightily to produce an electric car that would be affordable and practical for ordinary people. SpaceX, Musk's attempt to privatize and revolutionize space transportation and exploration, has succeeded in capturing a large percentage of the market for launching satellites (thanks in part to a cozy relationship with the federal government), but it has yet to launch humans into space, and it is a long way from achieving Musk's goal of a human colony on Mars. Moreover, as Musk's projects have become more numerous and ambitious, failures (like exploding rockets and missed deadlines for the delivery of the Tesla Model 3) have piled up, as have the debts of his companies. Musk, it seems, is a remarkable and visionary man, but he is not a miracle worker.
The latest sign that Musk may be overreaching is his “Starlink” project. No, Musk isn't proposing to build a bridge between the sun and the nearest star (that project is no doubt still in the planning stages). Instead, Starlink involves launching over 4,000 satellites in order to provide satellite-based broadband internet access to the entire planet (that's Earth, in case you've lost track). The grandiosity of the concept is breathtaking. Readers should stop to think of the tremendous investment in orbiting high tech infrastructure that such a project would entail. Musk is proposing to launch a fleet of satellites greater in number than all the other satellites currently in orbit. It's hardly a surprise that the timeline for Starlink has already been pushed back. Not only are the costs and technical challenges prohibitive, but arguably Musk's efforts are both unnecessary and redundant.
Why unnecessary? Because most of the world's people who desire broadband internet access already have it, and companies and governments are already hard at work all over the world to extend broadband coverage to the few areas that lack it. There are, simply put, simpler and cheaper ways to bridge the digital divide.
Why redundant? Musk is not the first person to think of providing broadband internet access via satellite. Existing companies already provide this service to many areas and customers, so there is no need for a global, integrated network of satellites. In addition, foolhardy as the concept may be, it is already being pursued by another eccentric billionaire: Richard Branson. His parallel project is called OneWeb. Boeing and Samsung are discussing similar ventures. It would be a shame indeed if Musk were to heave four thousand satellites into space, only to see them transformed into space junk because someone had beaten him to the punch.
My advice for Mr. Musk is this: you have enough on your plate building electric cars, colonizing Mars, and now (apparently) blasting Californians through pneumatic tubes. At some point, despite your genius, you must recognize that you and your companies are limited by what is financially and technologically feasible. We need you, and people like you, to dream big, and to reach for the proverbial stars. However, we also need you, and people like you, to keep your feet on the ground. Starlink is a bridge too far. Let discretion be the better part of valor, Mr. Musk, and let this flight of fancy go.
Hughs Net = Geosynchronous. Typical service 2/3 of a second delay. Low orbit satellite delay is about 25 thousandth of a second — same as cable or DSL.
Nikola Tesla >> Thomas Edison
...
Edison was the better businessman and quite a bit saner.
Tesla was the better inventor.
Both were much better than just about anybody else in their vocations.
The author of this — a political “scientist” — illustrates what is wrong with the U.S. He s not technologically fit to shine Musk’s shoes.
Immediate social concerns seem to be all some folks are interested in. The key, here, is that if you don’t like the way things are then change the conditions. Musk is changing conditions by pushing technology forward rather than adding to the snark fest of social media.
Look, you need to take risks and you need to do so without the carping of social scientists — “social scientist” is an oxymoron I grant you.
Does he consume our cash? You bet, but, given all of the incredibly stupid things that government does, I wold rather give a bit to Musk because he actually does things rather than talk about them.
Some will work, some won’t but the ones that work have the chance to change the world in ways that we cannot really account for.
Again, there is bad and good to this but it is the way it always is when moving forward. If you don’t believe me then quit using the net. After all there are many really bad things that have happened to us because of the internet, right?
Agreed. I’m just rather biased.
Dear elon: I want all the tax money you have stolen returned. Spend you own money and that of private investors.
I'd like to have a van decked out with a bed, desk, and computer with internet so I can "work from home" anywhere in the country. I'd take a year off of going to work and drive around the country working remotely during the day, and at 5:00, enjoy wherever I am.
Lock-on to transponder as low as about 42 degrees above the horizon, allowing 3 or 4 satellite to be within range at a time, given an unobstructed ground terminal site.
Given LEO at 480 to 660 mile and without correcting for Earth orbit curvature, worst case slant-range less than 900 miles, a 5 ms transit on first hop to LEO node.
How far can it go?
“Nikola Tesla >> Thomas Edison”
Apples and oranges, really.
Edison made things happen.
Tesla didn’t.
Funny, but musk isn’t anywhere near the calibre of Kelly Johnson.
You are quite confused.
Musk isn’t himself a company.
He’s just real good at talking himself into getting and spending taxpayer money.
And, guess what, were any businesses worth the effort they could do if by lining up this amazing resource called “investors” to take on the risk instead of taxpayers.
Amazing concept.
Don’t think so.
I’ve been reading Tesla biographies since I was a young teen.
I’d love to see Tesla’s wireless power, but it didn’t ever happen.
Yet.
It looks like one of the hypermilers got 670 miles, but that isn’t practical.
Doing a search for “model s range” should give an idea.
How can it not be known?
I can drive around 450 miles in my HondaAccord or Toyota Camry.
How far can one go in a Tesla and how long to recharge/refuel?
Google search returns:
249 to 315 mi battery-only
I know the idea is to swap out a battery at given spots along major highways to make “refueling” comparable time wise to getting gas.
But this limited range is a drawback to me.
It makes the car one that really can’t be relied on for trips of any distance.
My recommendation is that you don’t buy one. There are plenty of people who are fine with the range.
Some people won’t buy a Honda or Toyota because there are particular things they don’t like.
It's adorable that this journalism major thinks that broadband will be anything close to what we are using in just 25 years. What were we using 25 years ago as the top-of-the-line connections? Telephone lines and 14.4k baud modems. Today, 1 Gig connections are available. That's 14,400 compared to 10^9. In 25 years, kids will be mocking "mere" Terabyte connections. They will likely know connections with Exabyte speeds. (That's 10^18, or 1,000,000,000,000,000,000)
Are you trying to pretend that Tesla isn't publicly traded and has no investors?
TSLA Share price
06/29/2010 - $17.00 (initial offering)
02/08/2013 - $39.24 (price more than doubled in 2.5 years)
03/07/2014 - $246.21 (price sextuples in 1 year)
06/23/2017 - $383.45 (peak... price up more than 50% in 3 years, still impressive)
05/18/2018 - $276.82 (still up 1500% in under 8 years, and multiple stock splits... 1 share in 2010 is 58 shares today.)
Facts matter
And it still gets taxpayer money.
Are you trying to pretend THAT doesn’t happen?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.