Thoughts on this guy?

>>why
Because it's there, that's why. What are you, an intersectional socialist?

>Because it's there
anime logic doesn't apply to real life
literally no reason to spend billions of dollars going into space

The NPC scripts constantly tell me to hate him, but I can't, why would I, he didn't do anything to me personally, but I enjoy his optimistic view and enthusiasm, good for him

The 'idea guy' archetype, the only difference is he has the money to pump into his schemes.

A lot of his ideas are fucking stupid (underground tunnel under everyones house) and the ones that are good aren't new, he just has the money to throw at it unlike others.

how do you know he doesn't

It was fun seeing the NPCs turn on him as soon as he shitted on the media and started being un-PC.

>Literally no reason to climb a mountain! Literally no reason to sail to "the edge of the world"! Literally no reason to capture the strong, dangerous aurochs animals alive!
t. nigger

There was a reason to sail to the edge of the world
The other two are fine because they don't cost billions of dollars
There's no reason to waste more money going into space

Tell me that in two years when there's low latency LEO satellite internet.

is Elon Musk going to break the speed of light too?

Says a useless faggot.
Kys

>he doesn't know what LEO is
Stop, you're embarrassing yourself.

oh you got me there science boy

Overhyped moron. His obsessive nature has long since lost its usefulness.
SpaceX running the line between red and black.
TSLA afloat entirely by venture capital.

An interesting footnote to the early 21st century.

no matter how low your orbit is it's not going to be faster than going around the circumference of the planet

You're either being a contrarian faggot for lulz.
Or an Earnest faggot with a broken imagination
Either way you should kill yourself user

Attached: 1542891266129.jpg (771x723, 60K)

madman

yes

The point is low latency internet anywhere on the planet, not beating the few places that have fiber.

>broken imagination
Believing in memes from the 1960s where the US and Russia went to space to wave their technological dicks around does not mean you have an imagination
There will be no space age because there's nothing there
If you think anything otherwise you might aswell believe in religion

>copper wire with dozens hundreds of junction on land is faster than handful of satellites communicating at speed of light
Okay brah

youtube.com/watch?v=QEIUdMiColU

Who?

okay that is pretty cool
how much bandwidth can it handle?

based and redpilled

Attached: cheetomanbtfo.jpg (720x1280, 298K)

>anime logic doesn't apply to real life
Yes it does, thats how we (Jow Forums) got Trump elected

>he doesnt believe in our Almighty God
Must absolutely suck being you

He's based.

Attached: 2kzgvqhl5i011.jpg (1024x724, 107K)

I do, space travel is just religion for atheists though, they're basically giant hypocrites

Each satellites can handle ~20 Gbps. With initial satellite load of ~1600, that's 32 Tbps network load.

OneWeb is another similar concept, but with ~900 roughly half the size. And they plan on offering ~50 Mbps speeds to end users.

SpaceX will upgrade their 1600 satellites to something like 12,000 as they mature in few decades. They will probably offer military/businesses like stock market the ability to connect across the world at a much lower latency than the current one we have.

Mining asteroids solves the problem of rare/finite resources on Earth.

Settling and possibly terraforming Mars gives us a backup planet in case Earth gets rekt by nuclear war/pollution/global warming.

Developing all this space tech makes launching satelites and research probes in space cheaper which ultimately improves everyday life on earth.

You need to look at it long term. You are investing billions today, but it can result for much better quality of life in the future.

>>GO TO SPACE
>why
Simple.

Attached: image.jpg (1920x818, 499K)

So that's basically a few thousand users per country at slightly lower latency? That doesn't matter to anyone if you aren't in the military

I like how leftist jump to the conclusion that the media is run by jews

>terraforming Mars
Yeah and where are the plans for that? There are none, it's not even close to possible with our current technology, all you're going to do is spend a huge amount of money to make a shitty colony on Mars where people will die of radiation poisoning, low-gravity related health problems or boredom
You could use that money to improve Earth instead like Bill Gates, but that's too boring and not memey enough

which begs the question:
why shouldnt we spend the space money on fixing the earth

Lets say Starlink has 12,000 satellites up and has 20 Gbps each satellite. Let says North America users can use ~30% of the satellites with optimal results. That's 3600 satellites @ 20 Gbps each. 72 Tbps of usage. Now we find out what the normal network load for average user is. Lets say most generic people use ~200 GB per month/30 days is 77 KBps usage average.

So how many users can a single 20 Gbps satellite host? ~32K. Multiply that by 3600 satellites = ~117 million users.

>but I use 1 Gbps all the time, every day, every hour, every second SPACEX IS A LIAR

You're a retard.

>New technology is initially sold as a loss
Woah what a shocker. Both of those companies make a profit that is getting larger every year but you knew that didn’t you?

>it's not even close to possible with our current technology
Massive atmospheric change through orbital bombardment of material or cultivation of plant life has been a proven science since the 70s, read a fucking book.

>Let says North America users can use ~30% of the satellites with optimal results
the impression i got from the video is that you use the satallite closest to you, and theres roughly 4 for an area the size of spain

Because the Earth is run by politicians who are incapable of seeing past their 4 year term, and will deny any long term problems because the solutions are too slow to bring them political points.

I mean imagine telling China that they pollute too much and they should change to a cleaner energy. Why would the politicians spend money on that when they can invest in more flashy short-term projects that will score them points with the people.

That being said, Elon is trying to fix earth as well by making clean cars mainstream as well as trying to develop solar energy further.

based and redpilled

mars.nasa.gov/news/8358/mars-terraforming-not-possible-using-present-day-technology/

We can do the same calculation with the 1600 initial satellites too. 30% of that is 480. 480*20Gbps = 9.6 Tbps total bandwidth.

Since each satellites can host average of 32K users, that's ~15M users on average. Ofcourse that doesn't take into account of peak usage or anything like that, just the average. If we reduce the count to 70% capacity, that's ~10M users can be actively hosted on NA satellite region alone.

Routing softwares will handle optimal conjestion path.

The word you're looking for is "dilettante."

Orbital bombardment is not within current technology.

>Routing softwares will handle optimal conjestion path
yeah that still means you only have a few thousand users per satellite if it only connects to the closest satellites
You assumed America could reach 30% of all the satellites
Can a wireless signal be broadcast that travels nealy half the globe for every user?

he has a slight delusion and its empowered by his lack of knowledge, to keep that ride of delusion he delegated all those ideas to a group of less delusional people that get paid by him and the result is just a series of failed or eventually going to fail experiments.
I remind you all that he has the battery problem and their *solution is just a massive joke for big scale productions and whats even more sad is that some politicians think that it will work.

solution: make your car a ticking bomb (some install those bombs in their wood houses lol)

So my post that you replied to was correct and you can't read

Some areas have higher population density than others, and certain hours see more activity than others. Yeah on average it'll work out, but it's not spread evenly.

Absolutely. The calculation is just very very rough.

The video shows that going from london to new york requires ~6-8 satellite passes with millisecond being ~50. From london to singapore, its around double that with roughly double the latency.

So while direct broadcast do it, you can pass it to other satellites and still be ~twice faster than current day internet.

I'm not questioning the latency, I'm questioning the bandwidth
for the USA to be able to reach 30% of the satellites as per your estimate that basically means your wireless signal would travel the entire Pacific or Atlantic ocean before linking up with a satellite in the worst case scenario

I'm not sure what you're getting at. How would bandwidth be an issue? Explain a bit more.

>Study only addresses increase of atmospheric pressure through reclamation of existing CO2 and gas injection
>Literally even mentions redirecting comets and asteroids to bombard the surface is completely viable
Thanks for proving my point user, other fun methods NASA’s study didn’t cover are magnetic shielding and atmosphere protection.

If gas prices ever go up drastically (as in oil output can no longer meet world demand) he will be hailed and worshiped as a visionary who is saving humanity.

as of now he is considered a doomsday prepper

Well I'm sure you know more than NASA on the topic so I believe you in this case

All those politicians who are running Earth into the ground will be the first ones on the shuttle to Mars

You're being a retard. NASA didn't cover the topic because they were focused on, as the title suggests, current day technology. Its not a valid paper for proof of inability of humans to terraform Mars. Its not even a realistic paper about the inability of humans to teraform mars on a realistic timescale of human mars colonization. If we had people on mars today, then it could be a valid paper, assuming we don't actively purse any technology/research into technologies that can teraform mars. The paper specifically states its about current day technology, we don't have any humans on mars currently.

Each satellite can support 20Gbps. If more data than that needs to be sent, it needs to be sent to another satellite instead because that one is "full". 20Gbps isn't much, that's a few thousand users, I'd say your estimate was a bit too high considering how many people use the Internet to watch streaming video. So unless these wireless transmitters have really long range and you can submit from your house in the middle of the USA to a satellite over the Atlantic ocean in one go, this system is not going to support many users

Humans on Mars has little to do with terraforming it. I said we don't have the technology to colonize Mars in the present day and we aren't close to it either. The article says the same thing.

>Doesn't tell us the guy's name
>Photo doesn't name him either
Look, I'm not keeping up with all those shitty ecelebs. Is this that Peter Pie guy the kids nowadays all love so much?

We didn't have reusable rockets 10 years ago, let alone one that does reusable rockets for $50M a launch.

We didn't have smartphones 20 years ago. We didn't have laptops 40 years ago. We didn't have PC 50 years ago.

These timescale are nothing in human history. 100 years will have changed completely in how our technology would have progressed. Yet 50 years is close enough to us that we can claim some small predictions. We probably wont have mars teraforming technolgy by then, but by then, we'll have landed and colonized mars if all the current plans line up from both private and government. Once mars thing scale up, there will be plenty more resources/researchers on the possibility of terraforming mars. Its too soon to say its impossible to teraform mars. Might as well say heavier than air objects cannot fly.

I didn't say it was impossible. It probably is physically possible, but for humans in the forseeable future? No. And again, it has absolutely nothing to do with humans being on Mars, you think people are going to walk around planting trees? It would be done by robots or whatever the hell technology would be used to do it. Colonizing Mars as it is is a waste of time. You'd be better of literally building cities at the bottom of the ocean

B'd 'n' r'p'd

Real life Tony Stark. Better than you.

stealth jew brainlet
but still better than 99% of corporate slave masters

If everyone was streaming at the same time, your question would be legitimate. We'd barely have any, but people aren't like that for the most part given the environmental differences. I've set the number at 32K per satellite due to average usage over a month period, without accounting for peaks. We can even reduce the number down to half that to account for peaks, even third of that to account for maximum usages. But the numbers are fairly high regardless because the average users only uses ~200 GB per month even with Netflix streaming being counted. Average users are not super users who streams 100 Mbps 4K content 24/7. So as far as broad generalizations/calculation is concerned, the changes would be minor to the calculation.

>consolidated.com/blog/residential/artmid/7943/articleid/84/how-much-bandwidth-does-your-home-really-need

Just to put in perspective, Viasat has handful of powerful satellites. They have ~500K customers. They offer 12Mbps-100Mbps speeds to their customers.

not who you are responding to, but I think the first market for the satellite internet connections will be for financial institutions and other applications that require the lowest latency possible rather than high bandwidth, I know that financial institutions will pay out the ass to lower their latency to other markets by milliseconds. I'm sure there are other things it can be used for, google could use it to send routing information around the globe quicker for instance. So it may not be as important that they have high amounts of bandwidth everywhere, as long as they can guarantee lower latency than anyone else.

Technically, both are waste of time. We're better of masturbating endlessly.

To add to , the estimate uses average constant user speed of 77KBps. Most of the users of the time will only be clickin link and then spending a minute or so reading/looking at the page. If the average page load is 1MB and a person reads a page for 3 minute, then the average speed is ~5 KBps rougly dialup speed. So what happens to the 72KBps that is not used? That's added to someone else who will stream in the same space. So what's the ratio of people reading webpages to streaming? 1:10? 1:20? If its 1:10, then 720KBps (~5.75 Mbps) is taken account for someone else streaming. If its 1:20, we have a lot more room for other variables.

So we don't even need to take the 32K number down that much other than to account for minor peaks.

>our
You mean your.

Hey user, has it occurred to you that you are acting like a jerk?

somewhat snakeoil tech bro that is disjointed from reality of 99.9% people in this world and rides on the wave of cult following
his real achievements are mostly stuff not out of ordinary world/usual company work, and of course helped by him having money.

A normie millennial at heart with conservative political beliefs due to his apartheid family.
Essentially he is your average joe that lady luck favored which led to him being rich.

Globalist shill.

Literally everyone wants to colonize Mars, it's just easier / more fun to laugh at the person trying to do it.

I think a terrible accident will happen once he manages to put people on Mars. The US gov will kill him once he starts to work on his own Mars currency and his own Mars government as he stated many times before.

He reminds me of the character that Guy Pearce played in Prometheus - someone with genius who will try to live out his last days on another planet seeking immortality and building cyborgs.

>SpaceX will never launch and recover a spacecraft
>SpaceX will never reuse a spacecraft
>SpaceX will never land a booster propulsively
>SpaceX will never make a profit
>SpaceX will never beat ULA’s launch cost
>SpaceX will never launch and recover a heavy lift spacecraft
>Tesla will never release a viable electric car
>Tesla will never release a high end consumer electric car
>Tesla will never release a cheap consumer electric car
>Tesla will never make a profit
>Tesla cars will never beat other brands in sales
>Tesla batteries will never be a viable replacement for generators
It’s hilarious how this is the technology board and the naysayers continue to be unrepentant despite getting BTFO again and again

Jow Forums has been full of asshurt shills for a dozen years.

underage pls go

cute CUTE

Attached: adoreable.png (722x677, 617K)

to be fair, elon smellsalot has been making the same kind of wild, absolutely absurd claims that every company has been making about their upcoming product for the last 20 years.
It's just he's not making up marketing bullshit and knows how to find talent. Working for Tesla or SpaceX as an engineer is probably more prestigious at this point than working at NASA.

One of us.

Attached: 1524340245833.png (588x212, 23K)

Attached: downloadmusk.jpg (3500x2271, 2.81M)

My waifu

I wish he would have more babies.

Attached: 1541437768648.jpg (496x367, 42K)

no he watched too much sci-fi when he was a kid

DUDE