Slashdot Mirror
Soyuz To The Moon?
colonist writes "The Americans won the first race, but the Russians might beat them back to the moon. The reliable Soyuz, currently the only means of transport to the International Space Station, may send tourists on a voyage around the moon (gallery of illustrations). Constellation Services International's plans call for the Soyuz spacecraft to dock with a logistics module and an upper stage. The upper stage fires to send the Soyuz on a free-return circumlunar trajectory."
America did not win the space race.
Yeah, it's kinda sad how things just take longer when you don't have slave labor at your disposal. Oh well, at least after several decades our national economy isn't in the crapper.
You're an idiot. It's "there," not "their."
First men around the moon, first men *on* the moon: America (Apollos 8 and 11) - if anyone thinks that wasn't a win, you don't know what you are talking about - the Soviets simply couldn't match our determination and engineering)
Yep. Cowboys in space.
First school teacher blew up on the way to space.
First shuttle incinerated on reentry with a full crew aboard.
I'd guess we forgot to consider the value of a human in all these races. Money should not be an object so long as we want humans in space! Unless, of course, being first is the only thing that matters.
I love comments like this. If humanity actually EVER stopped to keep all of its members from being in poverty, we'd still be back at the level of the Spartans. They were the last (and perhaps only successful) society to function without money.
...in both cases, probably not much.
... I don't see either happening anytime soon...
There has NEVER been a society with money and without poverty, period. And I, for one, and SICK of hearing how people shouldn't do this or shouldn't do that because we should help the impoverished.
I'm not saying that the poor don't need help. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be agencies to help them. What I *am* saying is that the "this is a waste of money" arguement is a fallacy at best.
Conisider: What if Spain had used it's money to fund a social welfare system instead of Columbus's four voyages?
What if the US had spent Nasa's budget on the the "Great Society" instead?
The old give a man a fish/teach a man to fish analogy still stands. The trouble is that on a scale of more than one, it becomes a much more complex issue.
In the cold reality of day, we've "Fed the Children" for 30 years now, and probably will for 300 more. All it equates to is a temporary bandage, not a cure for poverty. There isn't one, barring full employment for the planet, which won't be possible unless one of two things happens:
a) We become a singular world government and start working on superprojects.
b) We stop the world economy and get rid of the concept of money. This, of course, will practically guarantee an end of modern society.
-Markvs
46. The Hobo smiles, his eyes glaze over, and he burps. "Beware the man who has lived longer than the Wasteland."