This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I think we might need to distinguish between positive capacity and negative capacity here. Consider the contrast in an example just written up this afternoon. The ability for an arm of the (US) state to quickly get people to the moon may not be as high as it was 60 years ago; the ability for other arms of the state to ensure that leisurely reexaminations of their own concerns take precedence may have never been higher.
Link summary: either Musk has started writing the SpaceX blog himself, or even the grunts have moved from diplomatic to pissed about licensing timelines "derailed by issues ranging from the frivolous to the patently absurd". I'm surprised the "it uses literal drinking water" quote (bold in original) doesn't link to a hot take on
TwitterX.On the other hand ... do you have any quantitative analysis of the munitions problem? I think issues with artillery production are somewhat more alarming than issues with Starship development, because the latter is designed for long-term economics rather than to give a middle finger to Russia (like the Apollo program or current munitions production) or to secure weapons capabilities (like 1960s expendable rockets in general or current munitions production). DoD isn't yet interested enough in Starship to butt in the way I'd expect them to do for an ammo factory, so any issues with that must be more fundamental than just bureaucratic infighting.
It could, of course, be that the government has pushed more patently absurd and frivolous issues onto SpaceX as licensing obstacles for some reason as of late. Not like Musk is a political enemy of the ruling party or anything.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link