Slashdot Mirror
Space Tourism?
Cave_Monster wonders: "With the successful return to earth by Gregory Olson, the US businessman who allegedly paid around £11m for his trip, what are people's thoughts on continuing with this trend? It is definately favourable towards generating extra funds for space programs, and with Mr. Olson preferring to be labeled as a 'flight participant' rather than a tourist, it definately begs the question as to how much input can these paying people have in space research? Experiments that he participated in included further investigation into how the human body deals with weightlessness and the possible causes to lower back pain and nausea, yet are these activities simply carried out so as to 'entertain' or is there real scientific purpose behind them? With the next 'tourist' expected to be Japanese businessman Daisuke Enomoto, should paying people have a real scientific background or is money simply enough?"
It doesn't matter whether or not your intentions for space flight are for science or not. All you need is enough cash and noone will care.
"Some fight for law. Some fight for justice. What will you fight for? One day, you will see."
If the space program can accomodate it and want the extra money, the extra passengers need contribute nothing more than money to the mission. If they meet the requirements of any other tasks in the mission, perhaps they should get a discount, or extra charges for the "extra fun". Whichever the mission planners can accomodate and negotiate. The exciting news is that we've reached a stage of space industry development where we have enough "discretionary resources" and minimized risks that we have the flexibility to engage in substantial nonessential mission components. Which means frivilous Moon trips are now in sight.
--
make install -not war
Space travel is expensive. No space agency has all the money they need to accomplish their goals. We no longer have the public support we had in the 60's so private enterprise is required to help send us further. If the revenue from these tourists helps fund further space missions then it is justified.
Do we make sure anyone who wants to bankroll the first commercial car knows enough about cars' scientific purposes before we deign to allow him to use one?
Of course you should "let" rich people buy access that later funds democratization of the new technology.
Rank my idea: http://www.sinceslicedbread.com/node/531
Should paying people have a real scientific background or is money simply enough?
That should be up to whoever is behind the trip. Maybe if the tourists are completely useless, they'll have to pay more to make up for their dead weight. But we're not talking about buying your way into heaven or something. Sure, traveling to the moon was a big step for mankind, and it takes on mythic, almost religious significance for us for someone to go into space. But bottom line, it's just a new place we can go.
If you've got a rocket and I've got a sack of cash, why shouldn't we be able to make an arrangement? You can't do your science without funding anyway. There's no need to be elitist.
The amount of scientific research necessary to make regular space travel useful is tremendous. It actually gives companies an incentive to invest research money into pure research because there is soooo much we have to figure out before it can really become part of normal life.
Let's cut the idealistic bullshit on something too. There is something about the government-centric approach to space that needs to be brought up. Who do you really trust to spend money wisely, an eccentric businessman who is getting involved directly like this or Congressmen and government bean counters? The government chose to lock us out of space travel on a private basis for a while and then did nothing to advance it.
This is just more evidence to me of why socialism cannot be trusted to provide for new and edgy research or art. This businessman doesn't have to think about the greater good, he only cares about his ability to fly into space and maybe advancing this for general society. I remember asking a socialist friend why a government owned media outlet would publish counter-culture works and small-time art/literature since there was no proven audience and it was all based on tax funds to produce it (thus an obligation to not be wasteful in publishing art). She couldn't give an honest answer. I think here we see the clear superiority of the free market. There is a lot of money to be made in space so there is a lot of reason for people to support research in this area.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
Things have changed, right?
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
With the next 'tourist' expected to be Japanese businessman Daisuke Enomoto, should paying people have a real scientific background or is money simply enough?"
Honestly, what kind of dumb question is this? Did you end with it just because you felt you needed to end with some sort of point?
The question is posed with the assumption that space travel is "owned" by someone (in your mind it must be governments), must be guarded, and thus people ought to be selective and have "scientific background" for the betterment of mankind or some sort of similar bullshit. Stop watching so much star trek.
Who cares about scientific background, space isn't owned by anyone. It's manifest destiny time with space. If you have the money, build your own rocket company and go up there.
"If letting a space tourist go up can attract media attention, then that's great. Its even nice that the customer pays the organization to create good marketing for the organization."
I guess; it works for brand-name jeans ans slogan t-shirts.
I'm not sure this is going to be a viable income source in the long term, though. That is, we can't depend on conspicuous consumption to keep our space agencies solvent. As for participating in experiments, when a university does a psychological study, they pay the participants, not the other way around. Eventually, the new is going to wear off and NASA will be back to begging from Uncle Sam.
The fact is, space tourism is a reality and it is a joke in its current incarnation. Basically, these people are rich bastards who dreamed of being an astronaught (nothing wrong w/ that). Whenever I watch video of these guys up in space, they always look like some little kid yelling 'whopee!' as they go for a ride. Do these guys really think they are astronauts? More like preschool children to me...
Since space tourism is here, and probably here to stay, a more valid question is, is this a good thing?
I think it is if it generates more interest in space exploration. It is not if it supplants manned space exploration. It could happen...I can see space travel evolving into a rich man's vacation...something to brag about to other rich people. It could be very profitable, which would direct space efforts toward missions that enable more profitable tourism. NASA missions would be about looking for more ways to make money, not to explore, understand, and one day colonize.
Basically, many Americans now have given themselves over to artificial 'experience' rather than actually DOING something for themselves. The pioneering attitude that made America great has been supplanted by a spectator attitude.
An analogy to the European settlement of North American: Imagine if people had taken this spectator attitude at the beginning of the industrial revolution. Instead of colonies, they would have made condos. Lewis and Clark would have been sent to look for better vacation spots instead of mapping the west for modern habitation.
Space tourists get to do something cool, yes, but they are truly 'spam in a can'. Spectators. We should make sure they know that, and that the cutting edge of space research is devoted to fruitful scientific and explorational missions.
Thank you Dave Raggett
"space" has to pay for it to become the new frontier. There simply must be viable economic paths to orbit and beyond. Rand Simberg has said for years that it isn't the technology or even politics, but lack of good business plans that have kept commercial development away from space. Telecomm is the obvious exception, because it has a good biz plan, and tourism seems to be finally taking off. Good news for the future. I get a kick out of otaku in Gundam clothes.
Also, what better measure for getting into space than paying a set price? The price is high, but anyone can work hard with that goal in mind. That it is an open, priced product puts it on the level playing field for all. Being a government Chosen Hero of the State is in no way egalitarian, but an act of status. It allows NASA to fly senators and Saudi princes, but stick their nose up when asked about paying customers. John Denver BEGGED them to let him fly on Shuttle, as a paying customer, they said "screw".
Josh
gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
Say what you will about Paul Allen (and given that he helped create Microsoft, there's probably not a lot of love lost for him here on slashdot), but rather than blow $20M on a narcissistic joyride, he funded Spaceship One and the first private venture to make it to space. That's cool. Damn cool.
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Science will come - but science isn't going to give us a colony on mars that we can go and visit. Industry will and capitalism.
I say bring it on.
It is time for the scientific strangle hold on manned space flight to end, and for our childhood dreams to come true.
It's not as if he handed someone a check for $20M and they shredded it right there. Same for ANY luxury item. People make 'em. Others sell 'em. People supply materials to make them and they get paid. Other people supply the suppliers and they get paid.
I suppose you yourself live in a one room hovel, and own no car, computer, cell phone, ipod/cd player, television, books, music, DVDs, extra clothes or shoes. Never eat out. Never see a movie.
If not, then for shame. Why are you spending money on yourself?
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
The Russian space program obviously has SOME qualifications... they didn't take *N-Sync's Lance Bass!
www.space.com/news/bass_russia_020529.html
I guess to make NASA happy, the Russians will only let people on with some minimal IQ. You don't want to be floating around in a vacuum with a guy who likes pressing shiny buttons.
But what would happen to that $20 million if it were not spent on space tourism? Unless you are suggesting we forcibly take the money from these rich people (which will certainly not solve the world's hunger problems), then that money would either have stayed in a bank account somewhere, or have been spent on something you would likely consider equally frivolous.
In any case, the money spent on this space tourism does not just disappear into space (har har); it goes to pay the people who work at the space agencies, who in turn spend it elsewhere, etc. I suggest you either learn to deal with the concept of a capitalist society or go live somewhere else (assuming you do live in one), where everything you earn can be taken from you and redistributed "to each according to his needs."
Your point about the environment is a separate issue, but because of the title of your post I have to assume the "wasting money on luxuries while people starve" bit was your main point.
Some people are poor. Some people manage to achieve great wealth, and while they do this the are increasing the average wealth of a society and of the people in it. When people reason like you - it ends in socialism and the have-nots and hippies suddenly trying to control the creativity of the people who generate the bulk of the wealth. This always leads to poverty and the breakdown of society. I grew up in a society where this fluffy bullsh*t was the staple diet - the consequence? The country has basically collapsed.
If you want rich people to move - just say so, we'll welcome them with open arms in Switzerland.
Sadly, the real motivation for the original investment was a combination of chest thumping to beat the commies and crazy paranoia about what the commies could learn or do if they "got there first". The fact that there were massive profits from the technologies that were developed was only an incidental aspect (though not enough profit to defray all of the expenses--or they would already be a successful business and wouldn't need any additional tax money now).
In the current situation, I'm convinced their main rationale is some sort of publicity, though it's tainted by twisted hope. Most of the people working for the space agencies and making the decisions about tourists know their odds of making a lot of money are much higher than their odds of getting a flying role in the program. Therefore it makes more sense to hope they could go as a wealthy tourist some day.
They are all good mathematicians, so they are unlikely to be suckered by the lottery tax. I'm only raising it as a more rational economic model than space tourism. I suspect they would reject it for the same reason I would: I regard it as basically immoral to exploit other people's stupidity. (Shucks and darn, now I can't join BushCo.)
So why have a space program? Because there is still stuff worth learning. However, maybe we (America) can't afford it now.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
The guy's Japanese. What difference does it make to him whether he spends his money in Russia or America?
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.