7 ms·

Is it me or is this getting absolutely no press?

mikemarotti 14y ago
I guess it's now on the frontpage of CNN but still - I haven't heard any fanfare over this and it's pretty monumental.
twoodfin 14y ago
Matt Drudge had it in bright red at the top of the "fold" until a few minutes ago. It's still there now, but without the color highlight.
chucknelson 14y ago
You'd think that of all groups of individuals, mainstream media would be able to come up with some ultra-hyperbolic headline to make this seem more exciting to the general public.
- Dexec 14y ago
  "Member of the PayPal MAFIA launches a ROCKET directly at the International Space Station. More at 11."
DanBC 14y ago
I agree. More people watched European Song Contest than are seeing this. Yet again something profoundly depressing about modern life.
- vecinu 14y ago
  I find that ESC used to be a great contest that launched some great artist (think ABBA). While it may not be as powerful or entertaining as it once was, I don't see why someone should be judged for choosing to watch it over a space launch. I think you'll find that the majority of the population is not interested in space exploration or development so it is quite okay to assume they would watch ESC over the launch.
  - DanBC 14y ago
    In hstory considerable coverage would have been given to first man on the moon, or even first shuttle launch. Space X is an important step in space exploration. It got less coverage than ESC - perhaps ESC is a poor example. What else did SpaceX get less coverage than?
    - vecinu 14y ago
      I suppose it all has to do with audience numbers. If covering the SpaceX launch would yield less of an audience than covering ESC or any other show, I think the logical choice for a media network is to choose the one that increases potential revenue. Let's not forget that media companies are businesses. They need audiences to survive and so they cannot cater to a certain demographic if they want a lot of profit. I don't think concluding that people don't care about the space launch because it wasn't covered is fair. It's obvious a lot of people do (see Reddit, HN, et al).
kristofferR 14y ago
They showed it live on CNN with a lot of commentary, same with the launch.
ChuckMcM 14y ago
I don't think its you. I've talked with various folks about the events playing out and the split between amazed enthusiasm and barely cognizant is not smooth at all. There is a noticeable number of people who don't care at all. I think that is in part that a lot of people don't understand the significance of what has just occurred. Even now there are people in government who are 'alarmed' that a private company has this capability. After all, its a technology we're attempting to deny the North Koreans and now Elon Musk's company has all of the parts it needs to build an intercontinental weapons delivery system. The Dragon capsule can be 6 tons. Even neophyte nuclear weapon designers could probably make a device that is less than 6 tons. What is worse is the company won't just die a horrible death if our government pulls all of its contracts. So where does that leave us? In a very very interesting spot. We are approaching a point where orbital launch technology will be available to 'everyone' and we have to deal with everyone having it. If you were around for the 'great super computer panic' that was when our government realized that there were no microprocessors they could constrain from export that would allow bad guys to build their own super computer using clustering techniques. Its a similar problem but with the twist of being actionable (or being able to exploit it against the national interests of the US more easily) Its also one of the reasons I've been following the progress of SpaceX trying to build their own launch facility in Texas. You might see how that combination (private space craft company + private launch facility) would exacerbate the problems for people who wish to keep this particular genie contained as long as possible.
- morsch 14y ago
  Is being able to launch into orbit equivalent to being able to launch an ICBM? I must admit I haven't thought about what the privatization of space (and SpaceX specifically) means regarding weaponization and proliferation. I suppose I always figured the main thing restricting proliferation is engineering the payload and not the delivery system. I guess that's only true for nuclear proliferation, though.
  - wazoox 14y ago
    > Is being able to launch into orbit equivalent to being able to launch an ICBM? It's harder. Early space program rockets were all souped-up ICBMs, including the R7/Semiorka (Sputnik and Voskhod rocket) Redstone (Mercury rocket) and Atlas (Gemini rocket).

I guess it's now on the frontpage of CNN but still - I haven't heard any fanfare over this and it's pretty monumental.

Matt Drudge had it in bright red at the top of the "fold" until a few minutes ago. It's still there now, but without the color highlight.

chucknelson 14y ago

You'd think that of all groups of individuals, mainstream media would be able to come up with some ultra-hyperbolic headline to make this seem more exciting to the general public.

Dexec 14y ago
"Member of the PayPal MAFIA launches a ROCKET directly at the International Space Station. More at 11."

DanBC 14y ago

I agree. More people watched European Song Contest than are seeing this. Yet again something profoundly depressing about modern life.

vecinu 14y ago
I find that ESC used to be a great contest that launched some great artist (think ABBA). While it may not be as powerful or entertaining as it once was, I don't see why someone should be judged for choosing to watch it over a space launch. I think you'll find that the majority of the population is not interested in space exploration or development so it is quite okay to assume they would watch ESC over the launch.
- DanBC 14y ago
  In hstory considerable coverage would have been given to first man on the moon, or even first shuttle launch. Space X is an important step in space exploration. It got less coverage than ESC - perhaps ESC is a poor example. What else did SpaceX get less coverage than?
  - vecinu 14y ago
    I suppose it all has to do with audience numbers. If covering the SpaceX launch would yield less of an audience than covering ESC or any other show, I think the logical choice for a media network is to choose the one that increases potential revenue. Let's not forget that media companies are businesses. They need audiences to survive and so they cannot cater to a certain demographic if they want a lot of profit. I don't think concluding that people don't care about the space launch because it wasn't covered is fair. It's obvious a lot of people do (see Reddit, HN, et al).

kristofferR 14y ago

They showed it live on CNN with a lot of commentary, same with the launch.

ChuckMcM 14y ago

I don't think its you. I've talked with various folks about the events playing out and the split between amazed enthusiasm and barely cognizant is not smooth at all. There is a noticeable number of people who don't care at all. I think that is in part that a lot of people don't understand the significance of what has just occurred. Even now there are people in government who are 'alarmed' that a private company has this capability. After all, its a technology we're attempting to deny the North Koreans and now Elon Musk's company has all of the parts it needs to build an intercontinental weapons delivery system. The Dragon capsule can be 6 tons. Even neophyte nuclear weapon designers could probably make a device that is less than 6 tons. What is worse is the company won't just die a horrible death if our government pulls all of its contracts. So where does that leave us? In a very very interesting spot. We are approaching a point where orbital launch technology will be available to 'everyone' and we have to deal with everyone having it. If you were around for the 'great super computer panic' that was when our government realized that there were no microprocessors they could constrain from export that would allow bad guys to build their own super computer using clustering techniques. Its a similar problem but with the twist of being actionable (or being able to exploit it against the national interests of the US more easily) Its also one of the reasons I've been following the progress of SpaceX trying to build their own launch facility in Texas. You might see how that combination (private space craft company + private launch facility) would exacerbate the problems for people who wish to keep this particular genie contained as long as possible.

morsch 14y ago
Is being able to launch into orbit equivalent to being able to launch an ICBM? I must admit I haven't thought about what the privatization of space (and SpaceX specifically) means regarding weaponization and proliferation. I suppose I always figured the main thing restricting proliferation is engineering the payload and not the delivery system. I guess that's only true for nuclear proliferation, though.
- wazoox 14y ago
  > Is being able to launch into orbit equivalent to being able to launch an ICBM? It's harder. Early space program rockets were all souped-up ICBMs, including the R7/Semiorka (Sputnik and Voskhod rocket) Redstone (Mercury rocket) and Atlas (Gemini rocket).