Off-Nominal - 220 - I Will Always Follow the Law, Senator (with Loren Grush)

Episode Date: December 5, 2025

Jake and Anthony are joined by Loren Grush of Bloomberg to talk about Jared Isaacman’s second nomination hearing and everything else going on around the industry, like maybe Sam Altman’s foray into rockets. Also, a little side quest into AI.TopicsOff-Nominal - YouTubeEpisode 220 - I Will Always Follow the Law, Senator (with Loren Grush) - YouTubeSpaceX Backer, Vying to Run NASA, Downplays Ties With Musk - BloombergSpaceX Pitches Accelerated Moon Landing Plan After NASA Pressure - BloombergBezos’ Blue Origin Lofts NASA Craft, Nails Booster Landing - BloombergExclusive | OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Has Explored Deal to Build Competitor to Elon Musk’s SpaceX - WSJRoscosmos replaces cosmonaut on next Crew Dragon mission to ISS - SpaceNewsTelegram: View @roscosmos_gkTelegram WidgetFollow LorenLoren Grush - BloombergLoren Grush (@grushcrush) - Instagram photos and videosLoren Grush (@lorengrush.bsky.social) — BlueskyFollow Off-NominalSubscribe to the show! - Off-NominalSupport the show, join the DiscordOff-Nominal (@offnom) / TwitterOff-Nominal (@[e-mail]) - Spacey SpaceFollow JakeWeMartians Podcast - Follow Humanity's Journey to MarsWeMartians Podcast (@We_Martians) | TwitterJake Robins (@JakeOnOrbit) | TwitterJake Robins (@[e-mail]) - Spacey SpaceFollow AnthonyMain Engine Cut OffMain Engine Cut Off (@WeHaveMECO) | TwitterMain Engine Cut Off (@[e-mail]) - Spacey SpaceAnthony Colangelo (@acolangelo) | TwitterAnthony Colangelo (@[e-mail]) - jawns.club 🐘Off-Nominal MerchandiseOff-Nominal Logo TeeWeMartians Shop | MECO Shop

TLS and go for main engine, start. Hello, Jake. It's, we're back. It feels like it's been a month, but I think it's just been two weeks. That's just the size of your turkey meal that's talking there. That's all that is. That's true. As somebody who missed Thanksgiving, tell me how you feel about it, Jake.

I didn't miss it. It was just a long time ago. I thought you skipped it this year. What did I do this year? I think I had like a very, yeah, I'm probably kind of counts of skipping it. Yeah. I think I mean, it didn't come up and we do shows on Thursdays. No, no.

Well, it's not on Thursday. That's why. It's on Monday for you, right? It's on Mondays, yeah. Yeah, okay. Yeah. That's why we didn't talk about it. Yeah.

Lauren Grush, you made it. I did. I'm here. You're a true American. You probably did Thanksgiving. I don't know if I would call myself a true American, but I definitely did do Thanksgiving. So maybe that's one. One of those imposters.

Well, what can. How does one define a true American? Let's not get into that. You're true. That's true. That's true. I think we're getting a little bit of separatism here. Yeah.

That's weird. No, yes, I did have, I did have Thanksgiving. I was in Ohio, which is where my husband's family is from. And it was nice and cold and it was lovely. Nice time off. It was a cold year in the Northeast. So that was a questionable decision on your part. to scoot on up north.

I agree. Luckily, we've had about 8,000 things happen since we've done a show about the topics of the news. We have Jared Isamon in return to, with some new lines. He had some new lines, which I would like to dissect. I thought that was good. Newer Glenn, Jake. Yeah, newer Glenn. The Soyuz launch pad fell apart, which is that, we have to decide.

two weeks if that's part of the off nominees or not this year. Yeah, that's a tough. It's like a late game tough one for us. It looks it looks funny. It fell into the fire, the flame trench. Like a rocket knocked it off, didn't it? Yeah, it blasted it in there. What's the latest you've ever had to add an off nominee nominee has ever been like a Christmas explosion? We had one that came after. Yeah, we kind of like, what award show? Is it the Oscars or something that runs it? it like it's it's like the they run it from the day of the show to the next one or whatever so stuff might happen that year but not win that year like that's how the often nominees works is anything up to that point so i think this one of the starliner flights happened in one of the star

lineer flights happened early december and then there was something probably a sooos or something that happened late december that made it the following year so anything counts up until the show so if something blows up the day before and we're were going to have to kick it around for sure. It could happen during the show. If somebody alerts us in time, I think we would probably throw it on the pile. Yeah. The best part is there's no rules, so we can just kind of decide.

Right. As we go. As we go. Yeah. Anyway. All right. That's what we got today. We got a spicy crew replacement on the ISS too.

We can maybe get into that. There's some tinfoil hat stuff there. We could probably. Yeah. That one seems bizarre for sure. You probably had the best experience that could inform us of that, Jake, as the only foreign national that's been to a NASA. Like, I know the I tar.

I know the I tar pain, like, just give me a call. We can commiserate over a vodka. He clearly didn't have the same handler you had because. No, that guy was all over me. You couldn't even go to the bathroom. I would not have been able to take pictures of a Falcon 9. Yeah. Did you bring something fun to drink, Lauren?

What do you got down there? I don't know if it's fun. It's probably, I feel like I probably drink the same thing every time I come on this show. But I have an in a. No, it's a. That was probably Eric. I did. I did.

I did. Okay. I got you. I have an N.A. today. This is my go-to in a drink. But to make it fun, I have it in my favorite coozy. Give me a second. Hmm.

That's incredible. Which feels right for the cold times that we are in right now. That's a great one. Is that the company, the puffin thing or whatever? Yeah. Because they listen to this show. Oh, they do. They've sent me stuff before.

Shout out. This is not a sponsored content of any kind. They sent me some of the spacesuit ones. And it's in a box in this office somewhere from when I moved. I have to break that back out. It's probably in the swag box. Yeah. So shout out Puffin. Probably should have been more appropriate to have a space suit, Coosie.

Maybe someday. Yeah. I'll give you one next time I see you. Jake, what did you make? It does look hilarious when you drink out of it though, because it's like a small person is jumping on your face. Exactly. Well, it's December, which means down here in Yucatan, it's time for Kirkland brand eggnog liqueur. Nice.

This is the most popular thing for Gringold. in Mexico this time of year. And let me tell you what. Costco gets it in and it's like a mad rush. Everyone's like on Facebook like, alert, alert. The eggnog, look here is here. And everyone just like rushes to Costco.

All the all the old senior white Americans are in there just trying to scoop it up, fill a card oven. And I'm in there with it. So yeah, I pour a glass. I got a little, look, I dolled it up with some cinnamon. Wow. That's really festive. Yeah, a little bit ice.

So, cheers. Happy holidays. Are you all decorated for those who decorate for the holidays? I don't. So I guess I am. 100% complete. I got some trees up. I just had to buy more decorations now that I live in a house that's larger than the last

house I lived in. And so I've decorated as many rooms as the other decorations fit. And that's where we're at. I like that. I'm waiting for you to become like a Clark Griswold and just like totally do the entire. Because you got the perfect house for it now. It's like that would be a very good, good facade. I need a tall.

It just proves that, you know, whenever you get a bigger house, it's like you have, you're like a noble gas, you know, you have to fill the available space with decorations. Our children. I've taken the children. Yeah. That too. Yes. Did we did you show your drink? No, I think I wrote this last time. I have a little hop-devil left. I got to clear out the last of the non-Christmas themed things

before I get into the mad elves and whatnot for the off-nominees. So. Yeah. All right. Let's start with a vibe check on how you thought the Isaacman second nomination hearing would go versus how it went. I did expect it. to be slightly spicier. And while there was no lack of spice, there was probably not as much

spice as I thought there was going to be, I think is my general. That's about it. Yeah. Like, what were we doing another hearing for? Yeah. Well, and, you know, every time, you know, I heard a familiar refrain of, you know, NASA getting back to doing the near impossible and, you know, other isms. We heard the last time I was kind of like, all right, well, round two or back in it.

It felt like the same, but like just slightly slightly more dialed in. Like he had gone, he had the chance to stand in front of the mirror and do it three or four more times. And so it was just like just a little bit tighter. I will say I did think there were more specifics this time around. I think last time it was very, he danced a little bit more around topics when being asked directly. And I think He had just a little more poignant responses this time. However, there was still some dancing, of course, which we can get into. I just, I enjoyed the, the, everyone knew the battle of Ed Markey versus Jared Eisenman trying to get the answer of Elon Musk being in the room or not.

The two things that were great were the, whoever worked with Jared on the, I have the same relationship with Elon Musk as SpaceX or as NASA does. great, great line. Should have come up with that. Yeah. Second, the, the, the, uh, the, the, uh, senator at the room was pretty big. It was a big room. There's a lot of people in there. Yeah, he was also, but here were all the other people.

That's what I would have done. I would have went with a list of everyone else that was also in the room when I got, if that was the room where I did get the nomination. I would just read off 499 other names that were in the room. So unlike Jared, who's like, we shouldn't bring anybody into this year. Like, I'm bringing everybody. I'm going to do the whole list. You're going to sit here.

I'm going to run out. time by listing off people that were at whatever party this was. Also, there's no chance that's where Trump offered him the job, right? Or do you think it was like, hey, you want the NASA job? I hear you're great. Well, and technically we are referencing the very first time this would have happened, right? Because there is a second time that he offered him the job as well. So I'm sure that was very different circumstances. But yes.

Yeah. I don't know if Edmarchy cares about that one. No. I feel like at that level, like there's very few opportunities where it happens is straightforward to that where like you like book a like 50 minute meeting added to your calendar, White House Oval Office and then like you just like walk in there and Trump's is like, I'd like to offer you this job and like hands you a piece of like, it doesn't work that way. I don't think. I think there's like circumvent conversations and then you hear some things and then just like one

day it's like in the news. You're like, I guess I got this. Well, I think it's on true social and that's how you find out. Yeah, or that, yeah. That too, that too. The official White House briefing room, Trit Social. Right. The real jih Tzu of this was the redirection of recompeting the Artemis 3 contract with, the understanding has always been that whichever lander's ready first is flying Artemis 3.

That was a weird one. Yeah, not sure that was discussed prior to this. Is that how you heard it too? Like, is that how it hit your ears? Yeah, oh, I definitely heard it that way. It was, I think there, I can't remember the exact quote, but it was something like, I think we were all under the impression that whoever was first would be landing on the moon. And I'm like, I don't think the engineers were planning to that, but sure.

And also, if we go back and look at the contracts for that were awarded, I don't think those dictate that either. But anyway, interesting. But before that, I do, I don't want to sleep on like the Ed Markey stuff. No, I think my favorite was the back and forth on whether or not he was, he's actually friends with Elon because there are no photos of him on yachts at bars together. Therefore, there's no relationship. Like, you know, Elon doesn't do those things either. You know that, right? Are there any photos of me in his airstream at Boca Chica? That's how you really want to know, right? But I'm definitely going to use that as an excuse in the future.

I don't know this person. Show me a photograph with them. In my policy around this nomination hearing, if you were to bring data to that fight, I would have brought up the photo of Elon in the Branson house in New Mexico before his space flight and be like, look at these two friends hanging out before his spaceflight and try to find some photos that look like candid shots of Elon hanging out with other famous people. But I don't, that's like the one in my head is that weird one when Elon apparently just showed up in the middle of night at Branson's house before this space flight. There are definitely a few Elon Candids out there for sure of him at parties and things.

We don't need to get into that. But anyway, you know, there's plenty of photo evidence. I didn't go to that UFC fight that everyone else went to. I didn't eat McDonald's on the airplane or whatever that other photo was. Look at all these places I haven't been. Exactly. Yeah. That's really funny.

Yeah. But yes, back to your original question, the Artemis 3. I was interested that that also seemed to be a theme just in general was, you know, the committing to the Duffy opening of the contract, that seemed to be something that Jared needed to, I guess, concede to get approval. approval. And I've also been thinking about how that might be kind of his first test in a way when he is, when, if we still don't know, if he is confirmed to v. Nass administrator will be, you know, kind of this blue origin versus SpaceX situation and kind of a, I don't want to say

proving that he is impartial, but it will be, I think a lot of pressure. will be on him to make the right, the so-called right choice on that. And the fact that it is between SpaceX, who a lot of people think he has this bias towards and then Blue Origin, their main rival, I think that will be a very interesting dynamic to watch play out.

Unless he told us the strategy in that answer, which was recompeting the contract isn't even like a, that's not like, that would be canceling the contract and doing a whole new round, which is I don't really, really think that's a feasible option given how that would go. But NASA instituting a policy that's like the Artemis Manifest is whoever's ready first flies. I wonder that's more achievable. The silly thing about that is it feels it feels more like just congressional jockeying than any actual

important NASA strategy. Because like really? Even if in a nomination hearing? No, but listen. Even if like it doesn't matter because even if the contracts wrote the stuff down like at the end of the day, if we actually got to a place where the SpaceX lander was not ready and Artemis 3 day had gone by and Blue Origin was standing there where the lander ready to go, of course they would fly. It would just fly Artemis 4 first. Oh, this is Artemis 4 and then they'd go and it'd be fine. We're going to do Artemis 3 after it. It would be like Gemini all over again.

Like nobody, like it wouldn't actually matter. Like of course, of course that's the only like sane way to approach it. Whoever's ready is going to fly. I guess what I'm curious about is at what point do you make that determination, right? Like is it after certain milestones have been achieved? Also, you know, is Blue Origins more expeditious or more expedient Lunarlander going to require money, you know, or additional money from what they've already been received? And then will that also require some kind of reworking of the terms of those contracts

to or is that allowed to happen within the framework of the contracts? I don't know. You know, I have a lot of questions about at what point do you pull the trigger on this? Do we need to pull the trigger on it now? It sounds like right now they're all kind of just going off of people's IOUs, basically. Like, oh, yeah, we can get this done. But, you know, as we know, this requires money. This requires contracting mechanisms.

So it's just, I'm just curious, does something actually need to happen in the near future in order for this, you know, this dual competition to actually happen? Probably more than dual too, because we've heard the government option thing, right? Where like Northrop or Lockheed or someone on a cost plus contract would then build this thing for, you know, $30 billion or whatever. But they're going to definitely need money. Yeah. Right.

They're definitely going to need money for that. So yeah, someone needs to pull the trigger on something. I'm just not sure what and I'm not sure how and I'm sure what. So I think that will be Jared's first big decision maybe. I don't know, even though I just, I don't know if it actually like, I don't know. People talk about the contracts. Like, oh, they have to change the contract. But like, do they really?

Because like the contract might state like a, year that it has to be done by, but we know that like it's not ready. They're going to miss that. And there's not going to be like a, it's not all the programs over because they missed the date and the contract. Nobody cares about that. They might they might have put like a name of the mission. Maybe they wrote Arbus three. I haven't looked at that, but I doubt they have. But even if they did like that's just a name of a mission. And so like there's there's no way the contract says SpaceX, HLS Starship has won the contract to launch the first lander and no one's allowed to go before them. And that's the not in the contract.

Like there's no way it is. That would be a silly thing to put in a contract, right? I guess it's just also curious because all they did were RFIs, right? They haven't done any really concrete RFPs. So at this moment, it doesn't feel like anything has substantially changed other than people saying that they can do better. But as we know, that's just not enough for that to happen. So I don't know. I'm very curious to see how it plays out over the next few months.

It's probably the, I mean, if we see something in the budget request that hits in, they always say February, but it's always March, right? If there's something in there specifically for it, or if we're doing another ad hoc, add 10 billion to the Artemis program bill. like yeah i don't i don't you're right in that i bet nothing else happens on it and they just try to run out the clock and hope that congress doesn't put pen to paper on it and force them into it right it wasn't evident in the hearing either right because you always tell you know maria campwell's asking blue origin questions and ted cruz is kind of asking questions just about artemus and jsc

generally though like he's a little he cares a little bit about blue origin and spacex because they both got the tex thing going and they hat tipped to the alabama people you always tell where people are coming from jsc is jsc is jacian is jacian much more his sure yeah his thing but it's not evident who was in there asking questions about the recompete from the government option direction right like who's the Northrop crew that was curious about that that wasn't evident to me maybe I maybe I missed it but I don't think that was really addressed I think it was mostly Cantwell who was talking about it to begin

with right um saying that she agreed with it but I don't think the government option was really brought up and let's be honest I mean if Jared had his way I don't think there would be a there will be a government option so I think that I think that I think whoever the the senator is that would push for that one is the only reason that something would get inserted into a budget because otherwise everyone has what they want already right whether whether whether or not yeah like maybe maybe Jared writes into law like whoever whatever lander's ready's first you know he puts a NASA policy together and that's in there right but the I don't think like Maria Cantwell would spend political capital on it if Blue Origin already has a

lander contract well I Unless you want the prestige of saying that this proud Washington company is the company that brought us back to the moon for the first time. You know, you want to be able to say that in a press. I guess. I think that's absolutely it. You know, like this is an option for Blue Origin to leapfrog ahead. She doesn't have like, hey, we need a thing. Maybe, yeah.

She cared about those composites for the other guy. We got a couple of starliners. Sorry soul that was on the other side. Yeah. Speaking of which, Lauren, what do you think? Which spacecraft capable of carrying crew that has flown crew, do you think Jared Eisenman is going to send to JSC? Because we have a funny theory in this show that he's going to send the starliner that flew

people on the way up and not back down. Oh, interesting. I've heard all sorts of kind of workarounds to get around that language. I think if you notice, well, we didn't. I can't remember. I don't think the shuttle came up at all during the hearing, did it? I don't remember. No, we just got that tweet from there.

Just like the Monday press conference or whatever, yeah, or the press release. Yeah. I would not be surprised if it was I'll follow the law situation and didn't necessarily commit to anything specific. Or I think what else somebody suggested that, you know, they're going to spend all this time figuring out the logistics because it is a logistical nightmare. And then, oh, no, Trump's administration is over and I'm gone. And then you won't have to deal with it, you know. That is like the least far-fetched like the theory ever because of like. Yeah. Especially that would ensue with the Smithsonian who's like, no, we own this and we're not moving

it. Like that this storyline is going to take so long that it's crazy. It's absolutely bizarre that anyone's spending any time on this? It would take at least 18 months to figure out how to move it in one piece. Oh, absolutely. I think it would be jammed up way before that. Like there's that. Well, we did a whole story on it, you know, a couple of months ago. And it was just, I was, I learned a lot about shipping space shuttles.

And the answer is extremely hard. And we used to have a plane to do that. Yeah, exactly. And so it just, the consensus is that. you're either going to have to chop it up in some capacity if you want to take it on the roads and then if you're not going to do that you likely have to build an enclosure on a barge to take it around the coast of the United States where it's probably going to get damage in some capacity there so I mean I'm sure you guys all know this but yeah I just I found

I was just thinking of all these different processes that at every turn it was like no can't do that, you can't do that, you can't do that. So it is kind of wild to see them continuing to push this. And I was going to say, endeavor. What a pun, not intended, but ultimately intended. But you did discover the inner workings. The discovery portion of this project is going to be really long. Yikes.

It's just such a weird thing to get. for them to be so hot about. Like, I don't know. Like, some of the stuff just, like, spending time on this re-competing the Lander thing, that makes a ton of sense because, like, Jake, you were saying, like, there's a lot of prestige in this. There's a huge contract.

People are grumpy about SpaceX. There's so many good reasons to be putting up a political fight about it if you're a politician. And there's just, and it's a classic one where, like, there's two people in Congress that care about this and no one else cares, so they're like, whatever, sure. But it's such a huge project that they're taking on. that it's unclear why, like,

how many people that live near you are you going to, Lauren, are going to be like, thank God we got the shuttle back to Texas. Probably the same two pushing forward in Congress. And maybe the director of the space center, Houston visitor center. I could tell you that most of the Texans around me probably don't even know that we don't have a space shuttle right now. I'd also like to take issue with this being called, like bring the shuttle home. Like, I get astronauts living.

there, but like, yeah, that's a bit of a stretch. It's such a stretch. Wasn't made there, wasn't launched from there. Has it ever been there? I will. I will. As a shuttle ever, well, to Jay. One of them has.

Pump the brakes. As a Houstonian and someone whose parents did commit their entire career space shuttle program, I will say. Call your parents right now and ask them if they think the space shuttle's home is Texas. Right now on the show. They will say yes. They will say yes. But I think at this point, it's kind of like that decision has been made. So I think there was, there's definitely some sour grapes for sure when the decision was initially made. However, that has that time has passed, you know, like to do something about it, that time has passed.

Yeah, exactly. And it's now it would be destroying, you know, these historical landmarks to make a point, which is, you know, very American. Also, if we're doing anything, like Enterprise, what are you doing up in New York, you know? That's a weird spot. Some people that I know that live in New York don't even know about the Intrepid Museum. Yeah, that's actually also true. Driven by it and, like, seen the giant aircraft carrier with large airplanes on it. You didn't notice the immense warship in your harbor?

Yeah, never remarked on the blackbird that looks like it's going to fly. fall on the highway. Like, what do you? Yeah. So I'm thinking enterprise maybe should get on up out of there. Yeah. We're coming for it, Jake. Another thing I thought was interesting is that technically you can fulfill the requirement

by just keeping the Florida shuttle where it is because it's near a center that operates the commercial crew program. and that's how it's written in the reconciliation bill, I think is that correct? That sounds right, yeah. Although I don't know the first part of the sentence. Maybe it wasn't it like transfer or something? Maybe they just relocate it within. Yeah, turn it around the other way.

Yeah. I like the best version of this, which is take the starliner that blew Butch and Sunny up and ship it to JSC and be like, have fun. We're not using it. I like that. Does that fulfill all the requirements? I can't remember. It was a spacecraft that used to transport astronauts to a center operating the commercial crew program.

It's a commercial crew spacecraft. That's what you asked for. You care about commercial crew. You asked for this. Boeing managed this program also. That is hilarious. I love that. Yeah.

That is such a good idea. That's the worst storyline for sure. I hate this storyline. I hate any time spent on it. It's just stupid politics. I mean, it's like, and there's some new update every week, every month, right? You know, now there's an investigation or they want to start an investigation and it's just, it's never ending. Yeah.

That's the truth. I'm trying to pull up this, was it a tweet about this Sam Altman situation? Do we care about this? Is this real or not? This just came out last night. We're real. Yeah. Like the Badenberg.

Wall Street Journal. Let's see. Open AI's Sam Altman has explored putting together funds to acquire or partner with a rocket company. A move that would position him to compete with Elon Musk's SpaceX. Something about AI data centers. Is this true? Space apparently being the one to hit up to get an investment. Investment ownership. Nobody knows. Is this true or is it trolling?

TBD. TBD. That's all I can say. I realized as I asked that question, I was like, Lauren's definitely not going to answer this question. No. I don't think she's legally allowed to answer this question. Legally, my hands are tied here. Just tell me, I will always follow this. the law, Senator. Yeah, I will follow all the laws. Yeah. What do you think, Jake?

Trolling? I think it's, I don't know. FOMO or trolling, I guess. I don't know what to believe anymore. So, like we're in a weird space where. Oh, good. Sorry. I was going to say, we're in a weird space where he may believe what he's saying is true.

And then, but it's nowhere near true. You know? So, yeah, I think I want to have a rocket company. Yeah. Well, I do think the trend of billionaires wanting to put data centers into space to support AI seems to be gaining a lot of steam, whether or not it is going to be the future that we live in, TBD, but that certainly seems to be all they want to talk about lately. And some non-billioners, some hopeful billioners.

Maybe they'll become billionaires by putting their data centers. Yeah. Jake's making so many faces. Where those AI take faces, he's a big, he's got a lot of these faces, Lauren, every time I talk about this. We had the, we had Ed on last show, and we were talking about data centers. And he had some good ideas that I don't think I'm sold yet. I just like don't get why would want to do that. It just seems like the most expensive and less good way to solve it.

I don't quite like we talked about last time. It was like it's only really super valuable when you're doing the processing for something right there. So like if I guess if there's like a bunch of satellites that need to access an LLM, then I go hard, I guess. But I don't think that's what we all wanted for, right? I'll be honest. I don't really know how it would. I haven't like looked into it very closely.

But now that it is something that is gaining traction, I think it is something that will probably become a big part of the narrative. But you're right. I think there's just a lot of questions and the feasibility. I mean, isn't that always the question about any of these big pie in the sky projects that space companies want to do is exactly how is this going to make money? How is this going to work? And oftentimes you don't really learn that until you're doing it.

And then you realize, oh, this is not going to work, actually. Yeah. It's one of those things, though, that might just be like a straight up business calculation that is when you look at the industry and you see the advantage that SpaceX has owning their own ground-to-space infrastructure and then you look at how Amazon has to manage their business and you're like,

is there an opportunity right now to scoop up a company that seems to have promise, which we should circle back to the Stoke space capabilities and like payload capacity and whatnot, but get a foothold in the industry so that you can have a similar advantage as a company who has such expansive views on what they are going to be tasked themselves with as Open AI, I get it from that perspective.

It's like a defense, I mean, honestly, like Facebook buying Instagram, right? Like, that was a billion dollars, which sounded crazy at the time. And now you're like, that was only a billion dollars. Yeah. That's wild, right? So, like, 20 times out on WhatsApp or whatever it was, right? Yeah, right? So, like, as a maneuver at this point in the industry where, like, we could reasonably

presume that it's a pretty mature industry, but on the scale of industry, but on the scale of industries in human history, it's very young, and you have a shitload of resources and you have an opportunity, then that's simple calculus to me if I'm Sam Altman, so I get it from that perspective. And I honestly don't actually care about the details of what and why he's doing it. It could be that. And it's as simple as that. And maybe it's a terrible decision, but it's also understandable if you're... Yeah, what you're saying makes sense, because like I'm thinking more about how there's like the other article that was like, oh, there's like a five alarm fire at OpenAI because, you know, Gemini is like scooping up market share for LLMs and they're trying

to figure out what they're going to do. And like all these LLM companies are still looking for their remote, right? They're looking for like, this is a thing where we can get in here and own the space and no one can touch us. And just having chat GPT is not that. Like that's not a, it's not a moated product, right? Right. But but like they have to keep working on it. It'll get there, right? Like, there's nothing, there's nothing stopping. I'll tell you that much. Google's apps still cancel it. They're terrible. Yeah, that's the thing with Google. It's like, it's going to, it's going to be in beta for 20 years and then they're going to get rid of it. Go away. But the point being, though, is that like other companies are doing this too and there's

nothing besides just they got their first and they're a little bit better at it. There's nothing about the product that's like a differentiator, right? And so if they can, if they can find the models are not. Yeah. Early on people are like, my model is going to differentiate it. And very quickly, you're like, no, it's not. Like everyone's model is probably, fine. Yeah. Well, this is outside the scope of our, you know, podcast topic, but, you know, there's all this discussion about the AI bubble, you know, and how long this is going

to last. I'm curious your thoughts on if, you know, tell me more. This is what Jake makes all his faces about, yeah. Well, will it last long enough for them to actually get the data centers into space that they want? I don't know. I don't know. I mean, probably not because that's,

that's like a, like putting a data center in space. Was that a 10 to 20 to 30 year project? I don't know what that looks like, but it's not going to be in the next year, right? I'm not a bubble guy. I'm not a bubble guy. I think this is throughout to lunch. I think, well, I think there's a lot of, there's a lot of hype around it, which means a lot of people come to it with notions of what these tools can or can't do.

And they, but if used in their way that they make a lot of sense and integrate with a lot of workflows and there's a lot of utility to be gained out of it and it's of all the things I don't know it was the first product that made sense to my brain in the same way the iPhone did

when it was launched as in like the world's different with these things in existence than it was before this is the first one all the other ones that have been called that between now and 2007 this is the first one

like meaning just this general use LLM capability it's not thinking it's just doing statistical stuff but it's still really useful for a lot of different tasks but people then it's so useful at those

that people are like well it must be able to do these other 19 things and it's like it will maybe one day but not yet so I just look at it as somebody that gets so much utility out of certain components of it and and I think there's then an easy assumption that people make that like the spending on it now and the infrastructure investments now are the start of a trend that will follow

exactly as it's been the last two years where like that line is going to be straight or curving up and I'm like I bet we'll find the things that it's really good at and dial in the business models appropriately in the same way that every other technology, when something hot happens, there's a ton of investment, and then Facebook doesn't have a phone anymore, and Microsoft doesn't have a phone anymore, and there's only things that are left are Samsung doing Android's and some weird Chinese brands and Apple doing their thing, and it's settled into an ecosystem that makes sense to people. But if you

were to draw the line out from like everyone wanted to do a smartphone, it looked like we were going to spend all the money that Earth has ever made on doing smartphones. And that's just not how it ever shapes out. And I feel like we're at the similar spot where you see the escape velocity of the graphs. And honestly, space has been like this, how many times, right? The 80s with like telecoms, it's probably the same as we are in the mega constellation craze now. It's like there's going to be 1,400 million satellites in Earth orbit doing the internet constellation. It's like, well, we don't have enough internet use to make use of that. So it probably won't. Right, exactly. So it's like a population curve of Earth, right? It goes wild and then everyone

kind of chills out. And then we all get freaked out about depopulation. It'll probably go up again. So I don't know. Am I too zen about this? Maybe. You two are a little bit, I don't know. More bubbly? You're a bubbler, Lauren? I am not making any predictions because this is- I will follow the laws, Senator. I will follow the laws, yeah. No, I'm admittedly a very slow adopter of AI, mainly just because I've been such an old grump about it when it comes to writing.

You know, because it feels like a direct, you know, competitor sometimes. And so I do understand. Me and Jake Code, we get it. Yeah. We totally get it. Yeah, exactly. And I'm not here to say that there's no utility to it, but I think maybe because of that somewhat existential threat,

I've just been very slow to adapt and to integrate it into my life. That's fair. my take to smooth your your thoughts on it is that especially in the internet era authenticity and taste matter more than everything and if you don't have those you're never going to really do anything interesting so like if you type of a keyboard or not I bet the stuff that you produce however you do it because like there was probably a day when someone like you was like I write all my things handwritten these keyboards are not for me I don't need them right like so if it's you pushing keys or not pushing keys it's still your

and taste that make it the thing that actually matters. And that's because we're humans. I'm hopeful that, yes, people forever will strive to have a human involved in their art and the media that they consume. But I don't know. That's just me. That's just my opinion. Jake and I also really enjoy SORA videos.

So don't get us wrong. I mean, I'm not. I'm not super worried about that either. Like I think I think there are certain jobs that are like art adjacent that are in trouble. Like if you're if the only job you had was like I take photos of random things and sell them to to stock photo companies like you're in trouble because that's just so easy. But like that's not if we remove that from the world, it's not like art is dead. Like that's not art. You know, we're talking about that. Right. So there's like certain things where it's absolutely going to be removing certain, you know, job. But like it's not going to end art because you're exactly right. I don't. I don't get all, like, excited to go buy a piece of, you know, open AI barf on my wall. I don't know. I was going. Where are you going with this? We were talking about pre-show.

We're talking about telescopes and stuff. Astro photography, right? Like, how many people do you see posting astro photography that they do that is very, like, interesting in art director and stuff? Like, the Hubble Space Telesco has been taking astro photos since the 90s that are way better than the ones that they'll take. But yet, Andrew McCarthy's still a really good photographer that takes awesome photos of the planets and the solar system and stuff because he's applying his, you know, authenticity and taste to it. And the people that are using Hubble also are doing that,

but it's just like, they're different things. And I might want to reach for a Hubble image every once in a while, but I also really like the photo that Andrew took of the guy with skydive in front of the sun because it's like weird and who would think of that? So, it's great. Not chat, GPT. That was great diversion. Sorry. Never apologize. Never apologize.

That was a great diversion on a... Okay, you're welcome. All right, so we are maybe more believing Altman might buy a space company. How about... I believe he might want to, that he believes he wants to. I just don't know if that matters in the grand scope of the story. If I think about the flow chart here, right? If you're Peter Beck and you own a launch company, then you're,

you want to get a space services company. So if you're an AI company, you want to buy a space company, then he's going to want to be a space services company. So maybe we've just found the next thing up the chain that everyone builds out to actually make a functional business. The only thing to pad the bottom line of an AI company. Are you a space company or an AI company? A little bit of both, actually.

I will say that, you know, as you mentioned, there does seem to be this, what do you say, escape velocity curve in terms of what AI is going to do and how impactful it's going to be on our society. And I could see that warping people's brains enough to think that owning their own rocket company makes sense. How about that? Although I don't, I don't, I don't, I'm not going to throw shade on anybody that has enough money to buy a rocket company to try to buy a rocket company right now because, God damn it, no one can even get close to what SpaceX is doing. And like, we're in the dawning days of maybe

Blue Origin is getting it together. But it's been 10 years since they landed that Falcon 9 and we're sort of having the same conversation when you and I started podcasting, Jake. It's crazy. Yeah. Well, I mean, let's get into blue.

But what about a bigger one? What if we had a bigger rocket? What if we had GPT 9x4? That would really solve this, I think. Hey, you got the terminology right. I asked how to pronounce it internally at the company, I got about 10 notes from people that worked at Blue. They all gave me the same exact storyline. And it's 9x4, which I think is the worst way to say it. It's kind of dumb.

What did you think it was originally? I thought I threw out many options, 9x4. You call it 94. Just skip the X. Is it 9x4? I don't know. Nine by four is like, that's dimensions. It's not, you're not. That's like a plank of wood. Right. It's not two things. New Glenn 36. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. Newer, Glenn. It'll, whatever happened to New Armstrong, maybe that will make a resurgence of the new rocket.

New Armstrong is just going to be newest, Glenn. That's what it's going to be. Nuest Glenn. Shout out, John Glenn, I guess. This is the problem with their naming structure. They've picked, they can only have as many products as there have been first American astronauts to do a thing. Ooh, there should be a new ride. New ride.

That's a good name. That, I mean, that one's a good one. Space suit will be new Isaacman. I guess it would be a new grissom, right? New white, Ed White. New white. New white, yeah. Not good.

Stay away from that one. Doesn't have a good ring to it. Maybe just come up with other names, I would think. I was going to say, you know, Amazon Kuiper rebranded. I feel like you can update it any time. Get away from the new naming. metric. Yeah, which has always been bad. This is not a new thing because of 9x4, by the way. I think the earliest, the announcement of New Sheper, we were like, that's what you're going to call it?

Yeah, that is such a great point. All right. What do you think about this chunker? What do I think about it? Yeah. It's got junk in the trunk. I think that image of it standing upright on the, on Jacqueline. I was like, that's a lot of rocket. It's a big ass rocket. That's a thick rocket, yeah. It's huge. But I mean, that made it all the more impressive.

I'll be honest with you. I guess, you know, we all knew the size and scope of New Glenn, but kind of seeing it, after having watched so many Falcon 9s land over the years and how they compare to the size of the barges that they land on, I think it was just, I was still genuinely shocked to see the ratio of rocket to barge at the end of the day. Then they put the infographic out with all the rockets for size comparisons. And like it's bigger than Saturn 5. The new one is, right? The newer one, yeah.

Newer Glenn's taller than Saturn 5. I just love it when they do that, don't you? Yeah, it's a little on the nose sometimes. The rocket measuring contest is just my favorite. metric. When will we stop putting Saturn 5 in it? What point in history do you think that will drop out of the lineup? I don't think it ever.

Never? That's like the Starship lands on Mars. You never drop Saturn 5 out? No, because I mean, we're still. There's not enough rockets to compare to still. I guess you also always have the Statue of Liberty in any size comparison ever, right? Like we've got some standbys. Saturn 5 is the OG, right?

Like you need to have that. It's kind of the standard by which we compare. And then I still, we don't have, I mean, what we have SLS. No one puts that in. Our ship. Known. Which is really funny. And then I guess now nine by four are the ones that are comparable in terms, right?

I mean, so it's still not a lot. N1. Yeah, that doesn't make it either. That's an SLS chart of like, shouldn't have done that one. Nine by four is wild because it's so interestingly comparable to SLS in most ways. Like if you look at the manifest of anything that's going to launch on SLS, 9 by 4 just about can do it.

I think it's a little short for an Orion to NRHO. It's a couple of tons short based on the data that NASA's put out about how much Orion weighs. It's unclear to me, though, because some of the data they put out makes it seem like they still include the mass at TLI with the upper stage attached and not clean without it. So I can't tell exactly how many tons it does. But 9 before looks a little short on that. But what I think is interesting is that it does, it will do everything that is co-manifested for SLS Block 1B to go to the gate. way will fit on 9x4 with likely I did some really bad rocket equation math likely enough room for any payload that was going to go on SLS 1B plus a tug to actually get it to NrHL which is what

Orion would have done for it on an SLS launch so it is the block 1B killer more than anything I was going to say I think you just lined up it's it's blue organs business strategy call me I know they also listen to this show so call me some of them have been on this show so call me I mean, you don't like spend all the extra effort to take the design you have and like retrofit it to fit some weird envelope of payloads without a specific reason. And so I think you're you're 100% on to that. Yeah. So do you think they started with like, hey, what if we made an EUS and then how do we launch that? What first stage do we need?

Maybe. Maybe. They started there. We talked with us a few weeks ago where it's just like, I think companies are starting to visualize the end of SLS. It's not here yet. But it's like it's on the roadmap now. It's like it's a sure enough thing in a certain time scale where we're going to start planning around it that it's not going to be here anymore, right? That is such a great point.

You know, I thought surely SLS was unkillable for quite some time. And I still think, as we've seen, it's definitely not going down without a fight. But yes, you're right. I think this idea that we're in the end game is more. it's definitely much more official than I think it's ever been since I've been covering the beat for sure. The worst thing SLS ever did for its longevity was try and fly a mission. I think that was when we put that out there and we're just like, wow, this thing just like does not, does not really work that well.

Like now all the development, you know, we were in a land of promises before where you could say, well, it's going to be, it's going to be really good. And so that's why we have money. But now it's here. And they got to like they got to put their money where their mouth is. fly stuff and it's like, oh, this thing, this platform's not really that great. It's hard to work with. Well, on the flip side, though, I mean, that is also the biggest argument that has been made for it. It's the fact that it has actually performed a mission. I can't tell you how many, you know,

of the supporters for it, that is by, by and large, the biggest, I guess, you know, piece of evidence that they have to say that, you know, we are ready versus any of these other options. They're definitely coming up. But I think that is kind of like the main sticking point that everybody likes to point to is the fact that it's actually performed a mission. That's a great point if the argument you're trying to make is that we need to get there first the fastest. Because if that's the goal, then yeah, don't swap it out or anything like SLS.

SLS is your Artemis through rocket, period. Like that's just. Yes. But if the goal is like, how? How do we have a sustainable lunar program in perpetuity that doesn't break the budget? It's like nowhere near that discussion. Right. That has always been my biggest gripe of Artemis is that people just don't know what they want out of it.

You know, it's we're going sustainably, but we also have to go there as quickly as possible. That is an oxymoron. You know, that. And so it's like all of these things that we want to try and do, the innovations that we want to try to achieve. I mean, truly refueling in space could work and it could be this game changer that everybody says it is. But because we have this shot clock on this, it just doesn't make sense when you have this time frame. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but I just get really so annoyed because it's like, what do you actually want to do with this program?

Nobody seems to know and there's all these competing interests with it. And it makes it so frustrating to cover because the requirements are going to be different depending on if it's an urgency question or if it's a sustainability question. Yeah. Or if you're launching a data center onto the moon. Yeah. Maybe that's the market for us. They got lots of money in the AI world. They probably, yeah, sure.

Four billion to launch. Let's do it. I'll put a data center up there. Let's go. single one baby i'll sell i'll sell 1.1% of my stock to uh to put a sLS launch on the books sure i just wish we could find a way to successfully fund an ambitious program like an artemus like a mars that doesn't involve having to beat somebody else but i don't think that has worked and So we always have to have some kind of competition, some rival.

I get it, but it's just such a bummer that because that's only going to work so many times, you know, once we've, let's say we do beat China. Then it kind of becomes, okay, then what? Once we beat the Soviets back to the moon, we eventually canceled the program because it didn't make any sense afterward. And so it's just not just that. You canceled the program and then you were. rattled with an enormous amount of infrastructure that required continuous make work projects

for five more decades after that, right? Absolutely. It was in the long run, I don't know if that was the smartest way to do it, right? So yeah. So we'll see. The future holds post. I would be curious. What do we think is going to happen after Artemis 3 actually happens?

What a question for the end. of, yeah. I personally will always follow the wall. That's my point. Let's see. All right, so Artemis 3, I mean, first you've got to decide when Artemis 3 is going to fly. And it's still tricky for me.

It's not the schedule they say it is, but I don't think it's as late as some people imagine. For Artemis 3? Yeah. It's past this administration, though. Yeah, but I wouldn't be shocked at like 2029. I have a bet going, and that is the date that I picked. Because it felt right to mirror, you know,

1969 for the first moon landing. So 2029 felt right. But yeah, I don't know. And I think what's going to be unfortunate is there's probably going to be a ton of pressure to make the landing happen. within this administration, and it's just not going to work. And I really, really hope there aren't any kind of concessions made in terms of safety just for that political win.

I don't know. We're not there yet. No, I mean, ARMS II has happened, which is the whole thing. Yeah. There's a lot of big heat shield questions. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, my gosh.

That's also another variability, right? Like, if Artemis 2, if they come out of that and they have to rethink something about Orion, that's a whole other can of worms too. I'm not saying, like, I don't think, I don't think they're going to do anything stupid on Artemis 2 that actually impacts the safety of the mission. But in the same way that Artemis 1 flew and afterwards, they were like, oh, we got some thinking to do on the actual way that we build this heat shield. Like something with the life support happens.

I mean, God forbid, something doesn't check out right in the first day and they didn't decide to just come on back home. and not fly around the moon, right? Yeah. Because the scrubber wasn't operating at the efficiency they needed to do the mission. That's highly possible. This is the first time the life support flew, right? They didn't have it on an arborist one.

So this is all brand new stuff. Something's going to not work right. And if you do that, the SLS schedule dictates that that's like a huge, because how quickly could they then fly in order of us two redux? You can't. It's not the whole next year. It's the biggest downfall. this whole architecture is that it's not changeable.

Like you just, you've got one rocket every four years period and you better make it valuable. That's just the, and I think the whole thing is, I think we have to fly our way out of the SLS program. Like SLS, Starship, New Glenn, et cetera, have to fly enough and do missions that fly us out of SLS.

And one really good way for that to happen is Artemis 2 to end up just being a highly elliptical orbit and back to Earth. and that resets their clock another two or three years to then fly the third SLS says that free return trajectory and then you've given another three years for Starship and New Glenn to hit that point and you know like a whole new batch of senators is in there and all a sudden tide's turn on the thing uh you know and then your date uh I was just you know we are we've started to think about our coverage for Artemis too but thanks to you I have now all these new anxiety.

he's unlocked that I hadn't. Already preparing for. Yeah, no. All the different failure modes. I call it the Peregrine flight profile. Yeah. Oh, God. A nice high elliptical orbit and right on back to the Pacific.

Yes. Yikes. Yeah. You don't want to pull a Peregrin on Artemis, too. No. That would suck, man. You're those astronauts? I'll spend my holiday.

Yeah, I'm going to spend my Christmas holiday thinking of all the ways Artemis 2 can go wrong. And that'll, that'll be how I start in New York. There's some dark ones in there too. So, yeah. Well, that's a good show. Okay, what's a high note we can end on? What's something fun?

Oh, did we want to talk about this crazy rumor? Or are we out of time? The above the cosmonaut. Oh. Oh, yeah. Let's do a quick couple minutes on that. Well, all I can say is I can't confirm it and it doesn't seem to be a reliable source. So I don't know.

He has been moved. The only thing I was pointing out was that this is for those of you can't don't keep track of this stuff or maybe can't remember the different Russian names. This is the same cosmonaut who came out of the Soyuz in the Ukrainian colored flight suit. That's the same drama, right? And then if you also remember there was, he was, they put him in like, they put him in the back of the space station during his mission and they put up all that Russian iconography and he did like a one hour live stream on like Russian propaganda. Like same same guy. It's their through line. It's like all these like really flashy points.

So there's something up there. I don't know. There's my tinfoil hat. I'm done. I would assume that there's something going on. Whether or not it's exactly what. I mean, it's only coming from what that one Russian media publication. So, yeah, until we get more details there.

I think what was Cosmos telegrammed it or something, right? Well, they telegram that he'd been moved. That he'd been moved, but not why. Allegation that he's been stealing SpaceX secrets, I think is only backed up by that one. Yeah. Also, like you're not, I mean, I'm not going to be. super nice to the Russian space industry right now, but we could probably send all the plans to Russia, and I don't really know if it would come together.

So, like, I'm not that worried about that making its way out there. It'd be like, given the technical diagrams for Merlin to me, I'd be like, well, these are pretty pictures. I also don't think it's a fundamental, like, SpaceX technology thing that keeps them as the outlier in the industry. Like, also because everyone that's left SpaceX went and made a startup, and none of them have we're taking SpaceX yet. Right, exactly. So I don't think it's like knowing the exact injector design,

that's the difference as to why ULA is flying one Vulcan this year, not 130. So, but Oleg, I mean, he's putting in the work out there. He's trying to get them shots. Maybe he runs out of eBay. He probably just like texted it to, I was, I was going to say, texted it to somebody high up and Ross Cosner. Like, these things are way better than all.

and they were like, you're out. You're out. You're out. Yeah. No, there we have it. Lauren, what are you working on these days? What do you got? Well, just trying to get through the end of the year, I'll be honest with you. Got some other stuff in the works.

Can't talk about it yet. Sorry, that's all I got. Great. Top secret Lauren article coming soon. feel great about this one what do you got yeah I am also just trying to get to

oh a prop for next week oh a prop got a prop because I live in a place where you can ship me things I got the book we're talking about next week Jeffrey Kluger's coming on the show we're talking about Gemini

you have a week to catch up Jake because I've made it through most audio books not long I already know everything about Gemini it's fine that but it's called the untold story so oh shit oh shit okay I don't know that one you would think it so that'll be fun it'll be a good time and then and then the week after that the off nominees so it's coming get your nominations in I can't wait get your nomination of the year it's it's something

this year I think it's going to be a good one we got some really fun stuff and we're waiting we think we think we can even maybe break some news on the show we're trying trying our hardest to get the video of the Gilmore space faring deployment incident that we've been told exists and has not been released. We're trying to roll it out on our show specifically so they can win it off nominate. Well, that you're trying to get it, you know? No, we've talked about this because we're putting public pressure on them. You know how like when... We're lowercase, J. journalists. We don't know how we're doing it right. I'm thinking of like when Disney and Google fight over, you know, ad rights, they just put it out in the

open or like when Sony was fighting about Spider-Man or something. You like to put public pressure and apply it to Gilmore Space, specifically the people that we've talked to who were about to come on the show one time, but we still haven't scheduled with them, that if you send us this video, you will win the off nominee. 100% chance.

This is a pay for play podcast. Okay. Give us our second scoop ever, and you'll win the off nominee. So that's how we work. I love it. Well, I wish you, I like this tactic.

It's not one I normally use. but I... You will follow the law, as we've heard. I follow the law. I follow the journalism laws. Journalistic ethics has been a big, big story lately out in the media. That's a whole other podcast.

A whole other thing. But I won't wade into that one. We've done enough on the AI front today. All righty. Well, I always love being here. You guys are the best. You're the best. Thanks, Lauren.

Thanks, everybody. Bye. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.3,000. Yes.