Slashdot Mirror
Global Space Agencies Gather For Collaboration
UltimaGuy handed us a link to a story on the Register site, covering NASA's plan to create a collaborative space effort across the globe. Agencies from 'Italy, Japan, China, Britain, France, America, India, Korea, Ukraine, Russia, Canada, Germany, Australia and the ESA' got together for the first time since the formation of the Global Explorations Strategy team last year. "This year, they met in Kyoto to discuss a draft Framework for Collaboration, which will set out how the various agencies will work together. The team has agreed that its main focus should be robotic exploration of the solar system, particularly of the moon, Mars and the near-Earth asteroids. It has also proposed a non-binding collaboration mechanism which would allow all agencies to share their plans, and look for opportunities to work together. This would also provide a route for agencies to share the data from their own missions with scientists from other agencies."
"This year, they met in Kyoto to discuss a draft Framework for Collaboration, which will set out how the various agencies will work together.
;-)
Uh, don't expect the US or Australia to ratify this framework for Collaboration
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
Very American centric view of 14 agencies working together - while NASA may have originated this particular arrangement - it is no longer their plan. The article even uses terms and phrases such as "the team' and "the group of fourteen" no particular mention is made about NASA's plan
Now that my grumbling is out of the way; it is very good to see these agencies working towards these collaborative efforts.I followed your link, expecting to find some mac hotness, but was EXTREMELY dissapointed.
Whoever setup that 'joke' site is SICK, SICK, SICK.
Everyone knows us mac users are gay - to be confronted with a good looking girl using a mac is just WRONG.
You disgust me.
They should be collaborating to make a Mars colony instead so we can get our eggs out of one basket. Plus, since it's an international effort, the goal should be the colony is an independant nation from the start and not a territory. Might as well make the relationship good from the beginning.
All space exploration will now come to grinding halt, as it descends into the abyss of red tape and never ending meetings. Space exploration will only accelerate if there is some competition - this move eliminates competition.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
My first thought when I read about this was the process of draftine IEEE standards for things like 802.11n. Delay after delay occurs, and according to some of the press on the matter, a lot of it is just due to infighting, each member of the committee trying to prevent another member from gaining any advantage... i.e. Company 1 has been developing a technology and proposes to add it to the standard, but it gets blocked because Companies 2-20 think that adding it will make it possible for Company 1 to bring out their 802.11n products faster because of their head start on manufacturing processes for the technology. And thus a standard that should have been completed years ago and brought new technology to consumers remains in committee as petty infighting causes countless delays.
As much as international cooperation can help prevent re-inventing the wheel in space projects, will scientific or jingoistic jealousies over who controls what aspects of a project cause delays as the parties negotiate compromises that have nothing to do with science, and everything to do with ego? Are we going to see a really cool project stall halfway to the launch pad because one of the countries got peeved, took their ball, and went home?
I'm all for international cooperation. I'm just afraid that most of the parties involved won't be very cooperative.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
Well... IT'S ABOUT TIME... Humantity devide has alto kick start the space race has only hindered the exploration of space in reason years. Instead resources is spend on killing each other and wut not. At least hopefully this will be a much better global effort than simply building a space station.
So we could see the launch of new satellites and spacecraft that conforms to this Draft 1 by next year?
*hides*
Your link is crap and you're an idiot. You give us mac users a bad name. STOP IT!
Screw collaboration: I'm all for the return of a space race: China vs. Europe vs. USA. Round 2 - FIGHT!
Instead of bitching why not sell your PC and donate the money?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The International Science Trust
For the enhancement of scientific knowlege and the required development of advanced technology, A International Science Trust shall be established, with funding authorized by participating governments, for the purchase of information about the natural world from Eligible Parties (private entities owned and controlled by other such entities in the participating countries or their unified free- trade partners). No less than 2/3 of the components and services used by the Eligible Parties to acquire this information must be obtained from other Eligible Parties.
The International Academy of Sciences shall identify areas of scientific interest in which the quality of research results are quantifiable -- primarily in terms of information content. Examples of these kinds of research results are: DNA sequencing (human genome project), digital imaging of various phenomena (astronomical, planetary, terrestrial ozone-layer monitoring), quantitative behavior of systems in microgravity, quantitative mineral assay of various sites (terrestrial and nonterrestrial), etc.
A dollar amount, to be established in conjunction with participating governments, shall be associated with each informative item and with varying degrees of accuracy of the information. That dollar amount will then be appropriated to The Trust to be paid out only in the event that an Eligible Party has delivered new information on the associated item of interest to a designated recipient. When a measurement has already been made, payout will be limited to information value corresponding to the increased confidence level of the measurement (e.g. additional significant bits or fractions thereof). In areas where an information flow is required (periodic sampling) the value of various sampling frequencies at the various degrees of accuracy (significant bits) will be included in the valuation of the measurement. Duplicate information flows will share the cash flow evenly. For superior information flows, the incremental increase in accuracy will enjoy less diluted access to funding flows allocated to those incremental increases in accuracy.
Income on The Trust will be used to adjust The Trust for inflation. Additional income from The Trust may be used to fund items within The Trust. In the event that an item is measured by a Party which is not an Eligible Party, and that information is available to the designated recipient -- the corresponding funding will be redistributed within The Trust. After-inflation losses will be redistributed within The Trust, deactivating items which are not currently being pursued by any Eligible Party.
Seastead this.
Overall, NASA collaborates with nearly all of the before mentioned space agencies, save one (china). In general, most of these collaborate with each other as well. Well, to be fair, India is just really getting going.
What I find interesting is the countries that were not included. In particular, Brazil. Brazil is much closer to launching a man into space than is South Korea. I would also think that South Africa and Israel should be in there as well.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
This reads more like self-preservation on NASA's part, more than anything. Here is why...
1) A launch to ISS costs NASA $300+ million, while a Russian effort is about $20 million.
2) Part of NASA's (and other countries) launches will have a military ambition. Nobody will likely to come clean.
3) Recall how suddenly NASA's Mar pictures became less red, once ESA got up there? For better or worse, NASA was apparently doctoring previous Mars pictures. This may be an attempt to "enforce" common guidelines, as to what the masses can be told.
4) Since a whole bunch of countries led by EU is planning on launching new GPS satellites, is this a last ditch effort to prevent it?
Moving on to highly speculative things aka conspiracy theories.
5) So far, the only game in town was NASA. Whatever they said was gospel. Irrespective of whether UFOs are buzzing around or not, there was no way to indpenedently verify what NASA said. When new countries start launching more sophisticated satellites, their reports may not gell with that of NASA's stories (like NASA's color of Mars). If there is a joint coloboration, at least there will be an oppurtunity to supress many stories.
This is simply some small collaboration. It is not the space building that has been going on with RSA, NASA, and ESA. Offhand, I think that China and America are still in a bit of a space race to get to the moon and control some of the prime real estate. Russia has been desperate for money so has been working with everybody. That is about to stop.
But It is a major part of why we are pushing COTS and did the bigelow deal. If NASA can not do the job, then private enterprise will. Basically, it is the multiple prong that America needs. In fact, I am hopeful that America will add several BA-330's to the ISS (or allow others to dock to it).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Funny... most the NASA stuff that I have ever seen (even the most trivial) has ITAR (think Export Controlled) status by default. That means NO collaboration with foreign members of my own research group, much less other countries.
-Tom
- You HAVE to be kidding. NASA sends up 7 ppl AND major payloads. In addition, the 300 million+ (more like 500) is all of our costs amortized. That includes the fix costs. Russia sends up 3 ppl and just the launch (without fixed costs) is more than 30 million. The 20 million helps defray the costs, but it does not cover it all. In addition, then they have to send up several mo supply ships which each at 30 million variable costs only. The only way that Russia could send up any of the loads that NASA takes up, is if they bring back the Energia. Considering that it was last used in the days of the USSR, that is not bloody likely.
- Right now, the shuttle is not used for military launches. And the military does not operate out of the ISS. Why? because they do not want everybody knowing what they do. While we are partnering with Russia, we do not fully trust them until we see that they will remain a democracy. And they are slowing drifting away (of course, many would argue that so is America). In addition the military has their own side programs, and some very interesting ones at that.
- Get off the hallucigen.
- What does America care about other GPS. They will launch and there is not much that we can do about it. Our main goal was to see that it could be shut down in time of war. Russia and EU have added such safeguards. Supposedly, so is china, but
....
- Wow, you must be a neo-con. In 1, you note that Russian luanches are so cheap, while ours are so expensive. Now, you say that we are the only ones, while ignoring USSR/Russia contributions.
Get off the drugs. It will help you see clearly.I wonder how much of this is in response to the seemingly inevitable situation where the private agencies will "git r done" faster and cheaper than the ponderous organizations like NASA who are now so mired in red tape and bureaucracy they can barely fling spitballs into the air.
Are you suggesting we feed rockets to these "Starvinfg kids?"
Nothing truly new is going to happen before today's school kids graduate. If you want an international population with the minds and drive to actually do REAL stuff, then you want an international population that dreams of space and passionately wants to get there. You won't do that with a press release. If you want a world fired up about space exploration, if you want the next generation of engineers dreaming of new ways to make this possible, then give them a reason to dream.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Whether something is a "waste of money" or not depends on two things: what you get out, and what you put in. This is called "ROI", "Return on Investment". Almost anything is worth funding, if it's cheap enough. Likewise, almost anything can be a waste of money if it costs enough. A cure for cancer or AIDS would easily be worth 100 billion dollars, but for 100 trillion dollars you could probably save more lives by feeding people, curing malaria, etc. so spending 100 trillion to cure AIDS would be a waste.
In my opinion, manned spaceflight is in the "waste of money" category because putting a human in a spacecraft gives you few advantages (given how advanced robotics have become) but increases your costs by orders of magnitude. However, probes, telescopes, and robots can collect some very vital data for (relatively) little money. Some of this data includes things like global climate change, which is important for understanding (for instance) droughts in Africa, which cause kids to starve. Keep in mind that a lot of what NASA does is monitor planet earth.
Its all about the mean between two vices. In my opinion, space exploration is important and will ultimately be a worthwhile investment- maybe not today or tomorrow, but in 25 or 50 years, the advances in scientific knowledge will help us make the world a better place. At the same time, I wouldn't want to cut food aid to Africa for a couple more Mars probes, either.
You can't fool me! That's from Star Trek!
Human civilization has finally advanced to Feudalism.
What's the next tech? Anyone have their "Sid Meyer's Andromeda" guide handy?
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
New virus that is very effective.
Massive asteroid will make Earth FAR more uninhabitable than mars.
In particular, one of two super volcano's going off, may make life very interesting.
All in all, we would be much better off being on another planet.
Besides, what do you have against being on another planet? It can only help us, not hurt us.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Their dreams were crushed when Orion was shelved.
It is possible for earth to be hit by high radiation wiping out nearly all life. The fact that ALL higher life has been wiped out repeatidly on earth argues it will happen again. So, when I see folks like flyingsquid arguing against sending life offworld, it strikes me that they should be ignored.
>> They should be collaborating to make a Mars colony instead so we can get our eggs out of one basket. >> This is a sci-fi pipe dream. Lets say our one basket breaks -- humanity is "#$"#ed, period. A colony of 20,000 people or even a million (and where is the capacity to shuttle them to Mars, I wonder? As a species we can put, what, 25 to 50 bodies in space at any given time at the moment? It would bankrupt the world to get sufficient craft capacity to get a million into space at anything like the current rates) will die out pretty quickly after the connection to earth is severed. Heck, no nations on earth are self-sustainable anymore, and we don't have the constraint of living in an environment which is lethal to us by default. What happens to the colony's power supply needs after their connection with Earth goes down? What are they using, nukes? Great plan -- do we know if there is any uranium on Mars? Nope? Oh, well, that could be a slight problem then if the yearly uranium shipment gets interrupted. Maybe there is uranium, great, all we need to do is dig it up. And process it. That just requires a huge mass of heavy machinery and some chemists, no problem, just 1900s technology after all. Ah, but those heavy machinery needed to be created in factories, which require big inputs of metals, plastics, and fossil fuels. Oh, no fossil fuels on Mars... shootskie. Well, we'll make them out of Unobtanium that the UN can research if we only fund their Mars colony basic research. OK, so we've got Unobtanium steamshovels and are trying to mine pitchblende. Now we've got to get it back from the mine to wherever we've got our processing center. Oh, problem, Mars isn't crisscrossed with ocean shipping lines, highways, and airports. Well, no problem, we'll build trucks out of Unobtanium and power them with fossil fuels... aww, shoot. OK, ethanol Unobtanium trucks. Aww, shoot, there is no Kansas on Mars. No Kansas means no freaking fields of corn husks which we can afford to turn into ethanol to fatten influential Congresscritters pockets and fill up our Unobtanium trucks. OK, we'll use hydrogen powered Unobtanium trucks -- I'm sure the UN can figure out how to lick the hydrogen problem despite the fact that its been 10 years away for the last 30 here on earth. So we've got our hydrogen powered Unobtanium trucks, which we can fill up by just combining some of that power we've got with cheap, abundant, liquid water. Oh wait, liquid water is neither cheap or abundant on Mars. Heh, my mistake. Well, they've got polar ice. So all we need to do is to have an ice mining center at the polar ice caps, to melt the ice, to use it to power our unobtanium trucks, to transport the uranium, mined using unobtanium steam shovels, to power the colony. That only involves a couple hundred thousand workers employed in an intricately complex dance of related industries to provide power. Now, the next problem: what are our workers going to do to prevent tooth decay? Brush and floss regularly, no problem. Well, small problem: there are no tooth brushes on Mars. But hey, how hard can it be to make a toothbrush... (For further ruminations of this nature, see "I, Pencil", which is a pro-capitalism attack on command economies. The thesis is that even the simplest of tasks, like producing a common pencil, requires too many inputs for one person to comprehend much less command. You can find a copy here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/760868/post s )
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
*grumble grumble* I hate HTML coding.
t s . I chose the toothbrush above because Soviet Russia once had none of them for a year because the bureacracy in charge of making consumer goods forgot to make them, and without a market to correct the deficiency everyone just had to do without.)
>>They should be collaborating to make a Mars colony instead so we can get our eggs out of one basket. >>
This is a sci-fi pipe dream. Lets say our one basket breaks -- humanity is "#$"#ed, period. A colony of 20,000 people or even a million (and where is the capacity to shuttle them to Mars, I wonder? As a species we can put, what, 25 to 50 bodies in space at any given time at the moment? It would bankrupt the world to get sufficient craft capacity to get a million into space at anything like the current rates) will die out pretty quickly after the connection to earth is severed. Heck, no nations on earth are self-sustainable anymore, and we don't have the constraint of living in an environment which is lethal to us by default.
What happens to the colony's power supply needs after their connection with Earth goes down? What are they using, nukes? Great plan -- do we know if there is any uranium on Mars? Nope? Oh, well, that could be a slight problem then if the yearly uranium shipment gets interrupted. Maybe there is uranium, great, all we need to do is dig it up. And process it. That just requires a huge mass of heavy machinery and some chemists, no problem, just 1900s technology after all.
Ah, but those heavy machinery needed to be created in factories, which require big inputs of metals, plastics, and fossil fuels. Oh, no fossil fuels on Mars... shootskie. Well, we'll make them out of Unobtanium that the UN can research if we only fund their Mars colony basic research. OK, so we've got Unobtanium steamshovels and are trying to mine pitchblende. Now we've got to get it back from the mine to wherever we've got our processing center.
Oh, problem, Mars isn't crisscrossed with ocean shipping lines, highways, and airports. Well, no problem, we'll build trucks out of Unobtanium and power them with fossil fuels... aww, shoot. OK, ethanol Unobtanium trucks. Aww, shoot, there is no Kansas on Mars. No Kansas means no freaking fields of corn husks which we can afford to turn into ethanol to fatten influential Congresscritters pockets and fill up our Unobtanium trucks.
OK, we'll use hydrogen powered Unobtanium trucks -- I'm sure the UN can figure out how to lick the hydrogen problem despite the fact that its been 10 years away for the last 30 here on earth. So we've got our hydrogen powered Unobtanium trucks, which we can fill up by just combining some of that power we've got with cheap, abundant, liquid water.
Oh wait, liquid water is neither cheap or abundant on Mars. Heh, my mistake. Well, they've got polar ice. So all we need to do is to have an ice mining center at the polar ice caps, to melt the ice, to use it to power our unobtanium trucks, to transport the uranium, mined using unobtanium steam shovels, to power the colony. That only involves a couple hundred thousand workers employed in an intricately complex dance of related industries to provide power. Now, the next problem: what are our workers going to do to prevent tooth decay? Brush and floss regularly, no problem. Well, small problem: there are no tooth brushes on Mars. But hey, how hard can it be to make a toothbrush...
(For further ruminations of this nature, see "I, Pencil", which is a pro-capitalism attack on command economies. The thesis is that even the simplest of tasks, like producing a common pencil, requires too many inputs for one person to comprehend much less command. You can find a copy here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/760868/pos
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
No doubt that energy is the key to colonization of mars. And yes, solar will not cut it. there is almost certainly uranium there. How much is debated. But since Mars is lower density, it is thought such elements as uranium is probably of lower concentraction. So while it is possible, it is not probable.
But there is decent chance of Geothermal. There has been recent volcanic actions there. Basically, as long as there are several GOOD spots for geothermal, then an independent colony can survive and even thrive.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Your link is brilliant. You're a genius! Makes me proud to be a Mac user. Keep it up!
"Oh, problem, Mars isn't crisscrossed with ocean shipping lines, highways, and airports."
But what about the canals?
Everyone knows us mac users are gay - to be confronted with a good looking girl using a mac is just WRONG.
Unless she's a lesbian.
Linux geeks can't get any pussy because Mac lesbian users have eaten all of it.
The why of (human) space-exploration
;-)
A frequently occurring debate I have is with the question whether or not we should have space-exploration (and as a subset: human vs. robotic space exploration). This involves the "we should spend the money on other things, like combating worldhunger"-arguments, as the more subtile arguments which is better: human or robotic exploration.
I have pondered a long time about this, and this is my conclusion:
We all heard the reasoning for abolishing space-exploration (particular human-based) before, and I think the major flaw in all these 'arguments' why we shouldn't go into space is that they always set economic factors as a premise. Or they use non-arguments, like "wouldn't the money be better spend on helping people in Africa"? Well, yes; and money spend on maintaining landscapes and buildings and statues too. And for that matter: the money you spend on your computer could have saved a dozen lifes in africa too.) Those kind of emo-arguments ring *always* true; yet are totally besides the reality of human behaviour, and thus, have little sway as a valid argument. In reality, humans crave comfort and luxe-products, and they will do so, EVEN if they could save dozens of lives with the same amount of money instead. And states spend money on a lot of different things, because a society involves a complex structure where a mix of interwoven activities are taken place, and solely focusing on one aspect would be disasterous.
But anyway, although economic viability is important to create a mass-usage of space(travel), I fail to see why it should be the only possible motive to start exploring space. It's a pretty narrow-minded, materialistic and typical capitalistic view on things. It's the same view that makes progress on medication for very rare diseases, or for diseases that are prevalent in continents that are poor, so slow: corporations can't see how they are ever going to get profit out of it, so they all turn their backs on it.
If ppl (including states) are only going to do something when they are sure of an immediate profitable return, the world has become a sad place. (And we should leave it the sooner
Arguments based on such a viewpoint fail to recognize other incentives apart from economical ones.
And the reason why we shouldn't (only) rely on robots? You can explore, but you can not colonize with robots. The will to explore is deeply entrenched in the human race, but with a reason: it has survival advantages.
A species that doesn't colonize new territory and adapt, will perish. I think it's paramount that humans always keep their spirit of adventure and keep exploring and expanding, because the moment we will go "ah, let's sit back in our sofa's and let our robots/droids do it", we're basically finished, even when not being aware of it at that moment.
So, to to all the people saying we don't *need* space-exploration (human or otherwise); we don't *need* the pyramids neither, nor all those great buildings and artworks, nor any luxury, etc. The only thing we 'need' is food and shelter. Based on what we truly 'need' thus, we should go back living like cavemen. But of course, we don't, and the reason is that we, as humans, look beyond our immediate needs and have (and should have) grander visions.
So, economics (and also the ratio of costs/science output) is often less good with human space-travel then robotic ones. Contrary to some zealots, I do not dispute that. But, as I have indicated, I do not think one should measure everything in terms of economic benefits. Even if you could send a hundred, or a thousand robots for the price of one human mission, it still would not change the fact that robots can't colonize planets, and augment the survival chances of the human race (and earths' ecology) through interplanetary spreading.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
Actually, a huge component of the Moon mission is learning and planning for a Mars mission:
/ why_moon.html
Mike Griffin, NASA Administrator: "NASA is moving forward with a new focus for the manned space program: to go out beyond Earth orbit for purposes of human exploration and scientific discovery." Administrator Griffin makes the case for completing the International Space Station, "the most complex construction feat ever undertaken," as a stepping stone to future exploration.
"Using the space station and building an outpost on the moon to prepare for the trip to Mars are critical milestones in America's quest to become a truly spacefaring nation," Griffin writes. "I think that we should want that. I want that. I want it for the American people, for my grandchildren, for my great-grandchildren."
RThisFM for more detail: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/exploration/mmb
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
If its just for exploration then cooperation is fine. Now, what if they decide to band together and lock out private competition? They can if they get together as that would lock up the majority of worldwide tracking and communications. They could also all setup similar rules for "safe and accountable access to space" that makes it to difficult for private enterprise to keep up.
but seeing that its an "internation group" I fully expect it to post lots of great ideas up front and then rely on 2 or 3 of the members to foot the bill
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
You're right! I sure do hate KNOWING ABOUT THINGS. Learning is the WORST! I'd much rather use a nice simple Mac so I never have to do anything complicated.
Using a Mac is like driving a car! You don't have to know what's going on under the hood; you just get in and go! And then, when your car eventually breaks down, you just buy a new one!
Who needs knowing! Knowing is for doughy losers!
So, your postion is it's too hard to do so we shouldn't try? And what kind of time frame are you talking about? A month? A year? A decade? Your limited vision seems to be that we all start building these ill equiped Arks and sling a bunch of goons to the Red Planet and forget about it. Hmmm...
I want to give you a very small hint you should think about, getting to Mars will acomplish much more than just getting to Mars.
If international cooperation between Governments is impossible, then the next-best would be international cooperation between the millions of brilliant engineers, scientists and enthusiasts that are out there, preferably with sponsorship from corporations and the uber-rich in much the same way that such groups were the major sponsors behind the Renaissance.
(Enthusiasts? Yes. If you got to run a spaceship@home program for doing CFDs on launch vehicles or other heavy-duty calculations, you could reduce the budget required to carry out a lot of the initial research, reducing the initial funding required. Once a fully-functional working prototype exists and has been launched - however minimally - any such venture is in a much stronger position to get the kind of investment needed. It's the initial work, where you've lots of heavy-lifting but no meaningful budget, that support from volunteers and enthusiasts would be a significant asset.)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
There's already a lot of International co-operation in space R&D. Take for example the Australian satellite Fedsat. Bus design by SIL of the UK, completed and re-engineered by Auspace in Australia, Star Camera from Stellenbosch in South Africa, Attitude Control System by Dynacon Canada, GPS system by NASA, USA. Telemetry standards by the European Space Agency. And launched on a Japanase H2A booster.
With a design lifetime of 3 years, it's been operational for 4, and was the first satellite to demonstrate self-healing of radiation damage in Space.
The key is to minimise bureaucracy, and have a single systems integrator. Probably not in the US due to some eccentric export control restrictions you have.
And yes, I had the honour and privelege of heading the on-board computer development team. I spent most of my time sorting out inconsistencies between the many different Universities in Australia involved, not to mention the International partners. Having to make decisions - one experiment suddenly needed more resources, who can I rob? Fortunately I always kept a reserve... so no-one ended up losing, and I could even give them a bit more than they asked for in the end.
Best thing about it? Well, at age 10 in 1968 I watched Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey and vowed I'd be working on a space programme in 2001. That, and being entitled to wear a T-shirt saying "As a matter of fact, I am a Rocket Scientist!".
Zoe Brain - Rocket Scientist
Hehe, you almost get the vibes of some sci-fi series with countries collaborating in space exploration. Maybe these events are to end up as historical in the history books? :-) I think it's a good idea myself, because, most importantly, the smaller scale collaborations between USA, Europe, and Russia have worked pretty well in the recent years, on many different planes, practical as well as theoretical.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!