this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
211 points (97.7% liked)

Space

10308 readers
222 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

πŸ”­ Science

πŸš€ Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] tonytins@pawb.social 58 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hey, DOGE, you missed one.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 44 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s almost like it was never about savings or efficiency.

[–] b3an@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

GET THIS UNELECTED NAZI OUT OF OUR GOVERNMENT!!!

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] Dogiedog64@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How does "Any and all of them" sound?

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

really good actually.

[–] threelonmusketeers 18 points 1 week ago (2 children)

While passive, noncontrolling stakes from foreign investors are welcome, it is the Trump administration’s position that adversaries like China use concealed investment strategies to obtain technologies, IP, and leverage in strategic industries.

I'm not an expert in international investment or intellectual property. How could a concealed investment strategy lead to obtaining IP?

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"Hey Musk, we invested $5 million in your company. We'll invest 5 more if you give us some of your earlier rocket designs"

Which would probably be an ITAR violation as a dual use technology export (dual use as in it has military value) if not something more serious, hence the secrecy

[–] threelonmusketeers 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Violating ITAR for 5 million dollars seems like it would be a irresponsibly reckless risk for SpaceX to take. And it's not like SpaceX are short on cash. That's like, 5 hours of Starlink revenue.

[–] theneverfox@pawb.social 1 points 1 week ago

I pulled those numbers out of nowhere, it could be billions instead, and would've been going on long before starlink. China did make a lot of advances with their rockets in a time period that makes sense