Slashdot Mirror
NASA To Deal With Disney For Commercial Use Of ISS
spiralx writes "According to this story on MSNBC, NASA is preparing to announce its first deal for 'commercial use' of the International Space Station. It is expected to be some kind of multimedia broadcasting deal, most likely to be with a Disney-led consortium." I'm presuming that liftoff is an E-ticket ride.
What happens if it comes falling back to Earth?
That'll be one hell of a ride!
No, no, no; this isn't a troll... it's honest, heartfelt agony pouring out of a soul that has had one too many exposures to capitalism. :)
"The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness."
"Some you will (recognize), and some will surprise you," said Tam
Like TBS. Nobody expected to see the "All Charles Bronson, All Weekend, All From SPACE Weekend!!!".
Or what about Cartoon Network? Wouldn't Space Ghost be that much cooler From Space?
or the FU Center,formerly the Corestates Center,in Philadelphia.(look it up,it's where the Flyers play...go Philly!)
Etot "sig" byit pisyat v Russki!
(35.0% Slashdot nezdorovi.)
------------------------
Thus Spake ComradePenguin
Oh yeah. :-)
That's the one I wanted. Glad that someone was able to find it.
make world, not war
Um, not to rain on your unsupported rant, but MIR is still functioning peachy keen. Articles here and here
Much Love,
"S"HM
*****
(I refuse to spellcheck out of contempt for your belief system)
"Patience is a virtue, afforded those with nothing better to do." - I don't remember
"Patience is a virtue, afforded those with nothing better to do." - I don't remember
You must have me confused with someone else. What is a Troll anyway?
:P
With that theory in mind, the ISS is a terrible thing to waste on what will eventually become an amusement park ride at "Brainwashing Children Everywhere" Disney.
Screw.
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
Those who think commercialization of space is the next great leap for our civilization, go read the article. Pay special attention to the parts that discuss NASA's intention to sell the rights to footage obtained from the ISS to the highest bidder, thereby eliminating a tradition of making these materials public and freely accessible. Also consider the references to embedding sponsors' logos into images and video footage sent from the ISS. Don't skip over the part where NASA sheepishly defends its right to freely distribute a small subset of ISS-produced material untaintained by commercial information. Read and weep, and, twenty years from now, tell your kids about the times when information, or at least the best part of it, was free.*
* Or at least paid for by citizens' tax dollars that went into its production and not toward another round of Disney tax breaks.
I loved the ticket system when I visited my Aunt in LA as a kid. She had a drawer full of leftover A - C tickets that we would use to go round and round all day. Not only did it keep the lines down on the big ticket rides, it gave you some incentive to do the funky rides.
I was heartbroken when they got rid of Inner Space to make room for some lame Michael Jackson ride.
Sheesh guys, leave him alone. He's posting at 1, not posting as much and is posting more readable stuff than the crap you are.
*Sigh*... Once upon a time, "Rocket Science" referred to complex feats of science and engineering, while trivial matters were colloquially known as as "Mickey Mouse" stuff. But now, they have become one and the same.
For the first space shuttle launch the external fuel tank was painted white. In all subsequent launches it has been a natural rust colour because the weight of the paint added to the cost of the launch. By how much? (I don't know.) If the weight of all the advertising would not hamper the shuttle's performance significantly then this could noticably offset NASA's launch costs. Especially if some (presumably Disney owned channel) brodcasted every launch on TV and the internet.
For a night launch you wouldn't have to add to the weight of the shuttle. You could project a company logo or two onto the white exhaust cloud.
just my two percent of a loonie
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
Sorry, man. I'm think Disney bought the Muppets & everything else Jim Henson did. I would love to hear that this is false, though. Anybody know for sure?
... after Earth, of course.
And I assume by "planet" you'll include moons, asteroids, and Dyson's Spheres as well.
(what would be an all-encompasing term? planetoid?)
Any sufficiently advanced civilization is indistinguishable from Gods.
And you thought the lines to get into Space Mountatin were long.
--------- Beware the dragon, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
In the mid 1980s, NASA was selling commercial shuttle time to Hollywood studios.
I think some stupid Space Camp movie was made by Disney with the Columbia.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
shouldn't that be the BHA Memorial Station on Mars?
Any sufficiently advanced civilization is indistinguishable from Gods.
Now, if the station is international, how can national NASA enter into any unilatera; contracts regarding ISS?
What we are attempting to do is engage the private sector in providing high-definition TV services and multimedia services so the taxpayers don't have to make an investment, and in fact have the potential for gaining money back from the profits that might occur," NASA Administrator Dan Goldin told a Senate hearing last month.
Okay, Dan, I'll be watching my mailbox for that refund check. I'm sure you'll be watching yours closer, though.
to ride "earth mountain"...
GrnArrow
grnarrow@removethis.bottomquark.com
O.K., here's the proof that I'm getting old:
E tickets weren't pink if I remember right; they were the orange ones.
Also, if memory serves me correctly, they stopped using 'em sometime around 1982.
---
Consult, v. t. To seek another's approval of a course already decided on.
I have a full book, from the days of old...
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
That was true in the days of Apollo, but doesn't apply to shuttle crew anymore. Mission specialists can be anywhere between 58.5 and 76 inches (149 to 193 cm). Pilots must be at least 64 inches (163 cm) tall. Find out more here .
I can see the fnords!
I recall a "Disney Planet" in Futurama.
Uh oh, they'll be having a little problem with the fact that the black and white headgear worn under the helmet are informally called "snoopys" by flight crew.
There's a nice two-page "Working Knowledge" article in the latest Scientific American about modern space suits.
[Hmm... the site doesn't appear to be fully functional... I need to make sure it's not my proxy.]
I can see the fnords!
As is, I hope that Disney has at least the taste and goodwill to broadcast the momentous first couple of days ad-free, even if that's when premiums would be at their highest.
P.S. Anyone here read the Red Mars series... great piece of space exploration and a look at the transnationals (metanats in their nastier form)
DisneyStar - By Ken Kopin
(Sung to the tune of "When you Wish upon a star")
When you wish on DisneyStar
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
will float to you....
If you visit for a while
It will soon seem pretty vile
Space is fun, and space is big
but it's not new
Movies many, we have seen
People dying on the screen
Everyone needs air to breath
no matter that there's none.
Save your strength, they're almost here
Exit slowly to the rear
We hope that you enjoyed your stay
On Dis....Ney.....STARRRRRRRRRR!
Why choose white shoes?
How tall is Pluto?
>Even though NASA has had some troubles lately, they are still the class act in my opinion that they always were. Once commercialism comes into the picture, it'll lose focus on the scientific efforts that are it's passion.
NASA has cut commercial deals in the past. Don't forget the exclusive Life magazine deal that made all the Mercury astronauts famous . . . .
The name Hubble is indeed very inspiring to me. He contributed greatly to our understanding of our expanding universe. Honoring a great man is far more inspiring than honoring "The Charmin Space Telescope - don't squeeze the mirrors".
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Isn't Disney the company that bought the Sonny Bono Act (20-year retroactive extension of copyright term across the board) from Congress during the Monica Lewinsky scandal? Jiminy Cricket (pardon my French) I think 95 years of exclusive rights is too long if copyright is designed "to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
Will I retire or break 10K?
Last I heard, EuroDisney had turned things around, and is now very successful.
Whoa now, I'd be happy with a few humans doing a show first. No need to start with the animal acts right away. Zero gee whoopi would have to be one of the funniest or one of the most erotic things to see. Uh, I mean study. Don't forget while the puritans may balk at the price, the wise know space can be paid for with vice.
Cheers Andrew
Ha ha. .sdrawkcab epyt nac ouY
I'm trying to read through your rhetoric. If what you're saying is that the ISS is basically a US project that everyone else is tagging along on, I don't disagree with that interpretation.
Russia hasn't fallen down on their commitments, but they are tremendously late. We bailed them out not because we wanted a space station and they were the only way to get one, but because US politicians (White House and Congress) wanted a deal with Russia to get them to honor the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The ISS project and subsequent money funnelled to Russia can be viewed as foreign aid with a pretty bow on top.
France is subsidized with US dollars? Please. France, a rich Western country, isn't even a partner, they have their own space program, and they're only connected with ISS indirectly, through the ESA. There's some "strong neutral" feelings there, but we may yet see an Ariane used to send supply flights to ISS, especially if Russia gets even more broke and cannot launch enough Progress flights.
The non-US modules are being built and funded by the respective countries, in exchange for access to the ISS down the road. The sole exception is the Functional Cargo Block (FGB), which was funded by the US but is technically owned by Russia. (It has two tiny flag logos on it, one Russian, one American.)
----
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
Wasn't this news posted on GeekFlavor yesterday or something ... ? Still, it's going to be pretty interesting to watch how this all turns out.
Is everyone else as frightened by this as I am? What next? - the DOD by McDonalds?
What happens if it comes falling back to Earth?
From the rec.arts.henson+ muppets FAQ :
"In the fall of 1989, the Walt Disney Company entered into negotiations to acquire The Jim Henson Company (then Jim Henson Productions) and the Muppets. Jim Henson died during the negotiations, and the deal eventually fell through. However, the JHC and Disney have sometimes worked together, such as for the (wonderful) MuppetVision 3-D at Disney/MGM studios in Orlando."
BTW, does anyone know what happened to Muppets.com?
A term like this can really date someone.. :)
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
Great. Now we can watch the ISS on ESPN instead of all those boring sports reruns during the summer. And they'l call it "xtreme sports" or something.
"Control the media, control the mind."-Cabal
tcd004
Here's my Microsoft Parody, where's yours?
Now all the astronauts will have to walk past signs that say "You must be this tall to ride the space shuttle."
--Shoeboy
(former microserf)
Disney owns so many media outlets now that guessing that any media contract may involve Disney isn't much of a prediction. Just a random guess among major media sources is fairly likely to hit one with Disney affiliation.
the deal will be called off after Disney demands that NASA put little mouse ears on all of the space suits.
We're already stuck with such uninspiring names as the Banc One Ballpark (nicknamed BOB, in Phoenix) and the new uninspiringly named Comerica Park where the Tigers play in Detroit. Do we really need to have our monuments and public works named by marketing people?
I'd hate to think that the Sagan Memorial Station on Mars could have been called the "Donald and Goofy Mars House (C) 1997" or that we might have the "America Online/Time-Warner (all rights reserved) Docking Module" or even that the next space telescope might be called the "Tasco (TM) Space Telescope".
I want inspiring, meaningful names. I want the ability to filter the uninspiring, boring ones with Junkbuster.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
won't be a theme park. Everyone in here seems to think it is going to be a theme park... why, I dunno. Disney makes movies too you know.
I don't see how they can re-coup the costs.. but whatever.
cheese
ISS
-----
I can just picture mouse ears on the sperical liquid hydrogen and liquid oxygen tanks by Pads 39A and 39B.
Free music from Jack Merlot.
Isn't it great that something which might be considered one of the pivotal moments in human history is going to be plastered with disney ads? I for one am sick of what should be public works forming "partnerships" with private sector companies. I'll tell you what; just increase everyone's taxes another 100 dollars or so. I'd rather pay a little extra to keep the corporate world restricted to earth.
uuh mir was not a failure. its been up in orbit around 6-7 years more then they expected it to be + they have done bunch of important experiments on it (for example: they researched how different types of organism reproduce in a weightless conditions, how fire spreads in a space + many other things)
-- http://electronicintifada.net --
Kudos to NASA for bringing in commerce money. Columbus used public funds (i.e. Queen Isabella's tax coffers) to "explore the Final Frontier". But public funds did not colonize (and wiped out the indigenous folks...) America. The West was won because of there is commercial incentives to do so (gold). Similarly, Space will be conquered not by NASA, but by the East India Companies of the 21st Century.
Mode (3) smart-aleck mode. Press * to return to main menu.
Great, now even taking a website off the planet won't render it immune to copyright lawsuits.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
While AOL is busy with its head up its @$$ and grabbing up ground-based media, Disney is conquering the skies to do a massive broadcast of Fantasia.
And I, while all this happens, read slashdot and post this message. (Oh, werd... an infinite loop of postings on slashdot, what an idea!)
Ever need an online dictionary?
>Now, if the station is international, how can national NASA enter into any unilatera; contracts regarding ISS?
Short answer: because the station is not owned in common; each nation retains ownership of the modules it builds.
Long answer: Station operations are governed by a suite of bilateral agreements signed in 1998 among NASA, RSA (Russia), CSA (Canada), ESA (European Union), and NASDA (Japan). These agreements specify down to the tenth exactly how much usage of each module each of the partners is entitled to [for instance, the Russians have 100% usage of their modules; the Americans have 97.7% use of theirs; but Japan and Europe have smaller percentages, mainly because they can't launch their own elements]. Most of the "financial" arrangements among the partners are handled by barter, e.g. we agree to provide X module in return for Y launch vehicle or J station support service or K slots for an astronaut from our program.
In the case of this ISS multimedia deal, essentially what is happening is that NASA is getting a third party (Disney) to pony up for the provision of expensive cameras and transmission equipment (ISS support) in return for the usual temporary embargo allowing them exclusive public use of the images. This equipment will actually be available to all partners to a certain extent.
Effectively NASA is providing something for the ISS without paying for it.
----
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
don't they know how insecure that is???
oh wait....
-Peter
The 1967 Outer Space Treaty does not ban commercial ventures. It bans national sovereignty and nuclear weapons and any obstacle to free access, among many other things, but puts responsibility for compliance in the hands of the signatories, e.g. the US is responsible for making sure that no US companies violate the treaty. The treaty didn't really envision private space launches, so it's going to be obsolete eventually, but it does have an amendment procedure.
Now, the 1979 Moon Treaty does ban, in effect, private property rights on the Moon. That's a little different, and a potential obstacle to development, but Russia and China have both come around to free enterprise and trade, and we'll have to see what happens. The basic problem is the same as Antarctica: everyone will eventually want the resources, the only question is who gets the benefits of bringing them back to Earth. Most likely the treaty signatories will eventually provide commercial charters a la those that were used to initially explore and exploit the Americas (like the Hudsons Bay Company). I think this is so obvious and practical that we can assume it as the long-term outcome, though I don't discount political delays in getting there.
>Since when does NASA overrule the UN?
Since when does the UN have any jurisdiction over NASA or the USA? The UN, contrary to myth, is not a world government, it is a diplomatic body governed by treaty. The UN sponsored, but does not control, the space treaty; only the signatories govern the space treaty. If the US signs a treaty, it's obligated to live up to what it promised, which is why treatys are few and far between and argued over for years. But as far as the UN is concerned, the Assembly can pass resolutions of condemnation as many times as it likes and the US, like anyone else (say Saddam Hussein) may freely thumb its nose at them. Even the UN Security Council is effectively toothless in the face of a permanent member such as the US choosing to flout its decisions.
----
lake effect weblog
{Network engineer in Chicago--looking for work!}
It's good that NASA know why they built the ISS and spent (so far) 24 billion dollars of US taxpayers money.
Multimedia broadcasting from the space station. Oh nooo couldn't use a satellite for that...
Fantastic. It makes the Millenium dome look like a work of genius.
Gimme Gimme Gimme - Karma!
This one is just a little bit bigger than that. Got to hand it to them though for being so creative.
Just a minor thing: ESA is not a European Union agency. There are (at least) two countries that are members of ESA that are not members of the European Union and three countries are members of EU without being members of ESA.
Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
Am I the only one here who read Pirates of the Universe?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
Yep, international projects tend to have their growing pains, at the very least. And both sides in this deal know that - remember EuroDisney?
--
More power to em...wish it wasn't Di$ney though. Though the name alone, says why it's Di$ney.
C
- Sighuh?
Hey, all right! Can anyone think of some more purely scientific endeavors that can be ruined be corporate involvement/takeover? I'm going IPO with my new business to sell print ads in elementary school textbooks. Maybe we can start selling ad space on artificial limbs?
...
Amateur science is becoming the only real science. Now if only we can figure out a way to expropriate some superconducters
bjord.org
news from the revolution
I wonder if it'll have a "Space Mountain". They could just throw you out of the airlock. A truly wild ride...
[pink beam of light]
Christa McAuliffe. Nah, she never blew up the Challenger with a GPF. 76 seconds just isn't enough time to boot up Windows. It probably crashed during bootup, not because of the crew.
Well, we all knew it was going to happen. If they paint a picture of Mickey on the side of the craft though, I will grab the latest keps, a nice big laser, and a huge lens and make sure he gets a mustache.
May 24 - The value of the contract between Disney and NASA has been reduced 10-fold when NASA admitted they were unable to fulfill all the expectations.
"We were shocked when we learned that simple things like a rotating DNA molecule built out of M&M's would not be possible aboard the ISS.", a Disney representative said today. "A NASA engineer came and gave a crash lecture on the so-called laws of motion, but we were not convinced. We, at Disney, maintain that the environment is not "in-space enough", and we will have to review the terms of our contract with NASA."
Of course, my favorite space commercialization scheme remains the following picture:
http://www.hallert.net/images/S huttleBudgetCuts.jpg
Disney, a Mickey Mouse organization, is famously successful. I imagine many companies would consider it the highest compliment to be considered on par with Disney.
Aside from snide comments and puns, that NASA is teaming with commercial entities for projects only bodes well for the future and growth of the space efforts. When there's profit driving development, things go fast.
-- @rjamestaylor on Ello
I don't think they want to kill the astronauts. ;)
The government is already angry at M$, besides the DOJ, the Navy recently gave them a rating of "0" for performance.
It's funny when your cable company's add/public access channel BSOD's but I don't think anyone wants to hear
"Uhoh Blue Screen Of Death..." played over again on the news
is This what you mean?
--Drive carefully. 90% of people are caused by accidents.
About a year ago I found an even better picture of the space shuttle with all sorts of other American megacorporations, but I cannot seem to find that one again...
Well, you're in luck!
Please, please, be kind to my poor pitiful T1..... please!!!
"The best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness."
Duck Dodgers, in the 23rd & 1/2th century!
In theory you are correct, however even though we have a unilateral flavor, most of the funding and technology is coming from the US. Didn't start out that way but that's how it is now. Russia fell down on their commitments and we bailed 'em out with our contractors, france and others are heavily subsidised with US dollars, both special interest and flat our loans.
NASA will have more money to do more missions, and it doesn't have to be taken out of people's paychecks.
Who could be against that?
I know. A bunch of Slashdotters who are full of hate for someone. Corporations (groups of people trying to make a good living by offering their customers desirable products and services) or Disney (a particular corporation) are the ones we hate today.
So fewer space missions or higher taxes then. Isn't that great..
Of course they did.
How do you think Christy McCullough accessed the shipboard computer in order to make it GPF and blow up the Challenger? You practically have to use a mouse with that poor excuse for an OS.
--
Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
"Once commercialism comes into the picture, it'll lose focus on the scientific efforts that are it's passion."
At least as far as the ISS is concerned, they already have. There are a large number of limitations to ISS that will make it not nearly as useful as it could be...for instance, the current design for the antenna to communicate with has it in such a position that it will only communicate with Earth on a limited basis because it will be blocked by ISS itself. This is already a bandwidth limited antenna. The current situation is not conducive at all to performing science...at least no science on a budget. So to make any real time measurements, you have to have a setup that is either manually controlled or you have to give up precise timing because you will be uncertain as to when you will have access to your experiment.
Plus the other commentor talking about how the shuttle already fulfills most of the needs of people in LEO. If ISS were to go higher, it would be more useful (i.e. the gravity would be less).
"Scientific research is still very important to Disney. NASA. I mean NASA," said NASA Executive Michael Eisner. "But it's time that we made it fun for the whole family."
New space suits were also introduced. Known as MICKEYs, they feature prominent round, black protusions on either side of the helmet, now in jet black.
"Those?" said Eisner. "Those are just satellite transponders. For the astronauts. I'm afraid I can't give out details right now, but I assure you, they are very important." Eisner then refused to say what MICKEY was an acronym for, and announced a warning for those who might try to figure it out.
"I've been advised by our attorneys that any attemt to reverse-engineer that acronym is punishable under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. And believe me, we're protect acronym theft wherever it occurs."
Eric S. Raymond was unavailable for comment, as he was being fitted for a MICKEY of his own.
Carousel is a lie!
Even though NASA has had some troubles lately, they are still the class act in my opinion that they always were. Once commercialism comes into the picture, it'll lose focus on the scientific efforts that are it's passion.
Soon to come, Astronaut suits with Ninja Turtles logos. . .
About a year ago I found an even better picture of the space shuttle with all sorts of other American megacorporations, but I cannot seem to find that one again...
make world, not war
I wonder if this is the future of NASA... :) On the other hand, if commercialization helps future missions, like putting three interferometers orbiting the sun, which effectively yields to a very high powered "telescope", helping to find those nearby planets.