Slashdot Mirror


2014: Planetary Resources To Launch Their First Satellites

symbolset writes "Planetary Resources wants to mine asteroids for their sweet, sweet minerals and make a business of it. The sparky little company has been writ up here on Slashdot numerous times. With the backing of such billionaires as Eric Schmidt, Larry Page, James Cameron, and many others, and such luminaries as major NASA project managers, engineers and scientists, you have to think they might have a good shot at it. Recently they picked up a huge engineering, procurement and construction partner: Bechtel. Their operations are already cash-flow positive by selling tech invented to pursue their goals, so they're a legitimate business running lean and intending to make good. Yesterday they announced the plan to launch their first space missions — the Arkyd Series 100 LEO Space Telescopes — as soon as next year. Beginning in 2014 their satellites will be scanning the skies from Low Earth Orbit for lucrative rocks that happen to be heading our way, and incidentally doing for-pay work to keep the lights on. For a reasonable fee they'll sell you the right to retask one of these telescopes to take a picture of anything you want that it can see, for a fair price. The plan is to follow up with harvester craft to go get these asteroids, mulch them, and sell their bits for profit. Some talk has been made of selling what are uncommon terrestrial minerals like gold and platinum, refined on orbit and deorbited at great expense as a business plan, but frankly that's absurd. 'Extraterrestrial Asteroid Bits' ought to go for a higher price on the collector market than gold or platinum ever would, and the temporal preeminence should draw a premium price. 'This 69 mg specimen (769 of 10,000) was one of the first commercially harvested bits of asteroid returned to Earth. Lucite embedded for permanent display, with case. Certificate of authenticity included.'"

76 comments

  1. collectables have a limit. by gl4ss · · Score: 2

    platinum and gold have practical uses. it would freak out the goldbugs though if it became financially feasible to get them from space and to land them.

    so yeah asteroid bits maybe for one de-orbit test batch.. after that the collectible value would crash.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:collectables have a limit. by bugs2squash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No you crush the asteroid and leave the parts in a stable orbit then charge the government to clean up the mess. Or the government pays you to leave the debris field in the path of any ICBM launched from N Korea.

      --
      Nullius in verba
    2. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mining of Asteroids is not practical.

      If the robotic mining of asteroids were practical,

          Why would the Anunnaki have gone to the trouble of terraforming the earth and genetically engineering a slave race to mine it ?

      Duh

    3. Re:collectables have a limit. by PeterPiper · · Score: 2

      There are 2500 tons of gold mined each year on earth with a total supply of 165,000 tons already mined. It will be quite a while before asteroid mining will make any appreciable dent in this supply, and until it does, it won't have much of an effect on it's price.

      Meanwhile, the most money to be made from asteroidal material won't be their importation to Earth. It currently costs $10,000. a pound to put material into orbit. I expect virtually everything mined off planet will actually be used for off planet construction and manufacturing, including gold.

      --
      Peter
    4. Re:collectables have a limit. by larry+bagina · · Score: 2
      There was a time that table salt - NaCL - was a valuable commodity worth it's weight in gold. Personally, my demand for salt exceeds my demand for gold. Anyhow, today salt is a commodity. Hell, the Bloombergs of the world think there's too much of it.

      Food for thought. Take with a grain of salt.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    5. Re:collectables have a limit. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      It currently costs $10,000. a pound to put material into orbit.

      Probably costs a lot less to get it out of orbit. Just sayin'.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    6. Re:collectables have a limit. by Khyber · · Score: 1

      " It will be quite a while before asteroid mining will make any appreciable dent in this supply"

      I think you underestimate the usefulness of metals formed in high gravity and expelled out into space while still molten, under a low-gravity field. The crystalline structure alone will bring us majorly new insights into physics in space.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    7. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Hey organization that maintains a monopoly on the use of force, we are going to extort you."

      Sounds like a good plan.

    8. Re:collectables have a limit. by jfengel · · Score: 1

      it would freak out the goldbugs though if it became financially feasible to get them from space and to land them

      That's good enough reason to do it, as far as I'm concerned. Getting usable metals out of it would just be gravy.

    9. Re:collectables have a limit. by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was confused by that bit of the summary -- it implies that it's expensive to deorbit something. Getting something up is expensive. Getting something down is (relatively) cheap.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    10. Re:collectables have a limit. by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      In LEO it's pretty much free if you have no particular timetable for it. The ISS will re-enter in what, about 6-10 years if it doesn't fire it's station keeping thrusters every once in a while?

    11. Re:collectables have a limit. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I expect virtually everything mined off planet will actually be used for off planet construction and manufacturing, including gold.

      I think that's the whole idea.

    12. Re:collectables have a limit. by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

      Let me get this strait. You want to black mail a country with a multi-trillion dollar GDP that has no qualms about killing people with drones? Let me know how that works out for you.

      --
      Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
    13. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could you explain what made it that expensive, considering how easy it is to manufacture out of seawater?

    14. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And people flew to the sea shore in 747s in 1300? Are you a fucking clueless dumbfuck, or just a regular dumbfuck?

    15. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I was confused by that bit of the summary -- it implies that it's expensive to deorbit something. Getting something up is expensive. Getting something down is (relatively) cheap.

      The implication is correct. It is not the actual deorbitation method that costs $10,000 per pound but since the cost of transportation to orbit is so high you essentially increases the value of something by 10,000$ per pound by moving it into orbit if it is of any use there.
      If you have something in orbit and you deorbit it you essentially decreases its value by $10,000 per pound excluding the cost of the actual deorbitation.
      This assumes that you can find a buyer for it that is willing to pay the price.

      This is the same way it used to work for exotic spices and materials on earth before we got effective transportation costs. It used to be relatively cheap to buy pepper and silk in east Asia, by transporting it to Europe you increased its value by so much that it was worth to have a ship and crew travel the distance for a long time to transport it.

    16. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, it worked for the financial industry.

    17. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who the fuck lived in the middle of continent in 1300?

    18. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most practical at the moment is mining asteroids for water. It cost $10,000 to deliver 1 litre of water into space, so mining it and using it in space is a very good idea since it can be done a whole lot cheaper (probably not from let go, but in say 5-10 years after first mining operations commence).

      Water can be used by ISS astronauts and by future space stations.
      Water can be split by electricity into Oxygen for breathing and Hydrogen for fuel.
      Water can be used to grow plants in space saving on food.

      If water can be cheaply extracted from asteroids and comets, it will free a lot of space and weight on current rockets to launch more people/satellites into orbit and make sustaining them there a whole lot cheaper.

    19. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check your geography, sure there were prominent port cities, but even 50 miles inland was a significant distance to cart things over land. If you are near a navigable river that reaches, it was probably not that expensive, but there are plenty of rivers that are artificially navigable today that even barge traffic would be questionable on in that period.

    20. Re:collectables have a limit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Provided there's something resembling a trail, 50 miles is two days there and two days back. Gold must have been really fucking cheap back then.

  2. Berlin Wall by NEDHead · · Score: 2

    I have a small piece in a plastic case, with a certificate.

    It looks like concrete rubble from, oh, anywhere.

    Fortunately I got it at a discount.

    1. Re:Berlin Wall by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      And, why it won't work. Selling space gold at a higher rate is simply predicting the scandalous headline "Space Corp Fraud!"

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  3. Profitable? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After their IPO, Planetary Resources, Inc will cancel all asteroid retrieval plans, lay off all their R&D staff, and milk what they've got left for all its worth. People will defend this with things like "It's not like we needed some stupid asteroid anyway".

  4. Seems like they have some good ideas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought this was going to be some sort of mega dream that might or might not have went anywhere.

    But it seems my opinion was a little hasty, they seem to have some pretty damn good work done already, and a good way to get some money while the scanners are out looking for places to mine.

    Looks like I might actually be a space trucker before I die! Or a space pirate. Either way, I win.

  5. How do we authenticate that this is a piece of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    asteroid and not a rock from someones back yard. Radiation? Carbon dating? Spectrographic analysis?

    With the exception of unobtainium which obviously floats.

    1. Re:How do we authenticate that this is a piece of by DougOtto · · Score: 1

      I certificate of authenticity, signed by Dr. Nick Riviera.

      --
      Solving Unix problems since 1989...
  6. Launch? by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    Unless they announce when and on what vehicle they are going to launch, I'm not sure you can say "they announced the plan to launch their first space missions."
    It's not a plan to launch if they don't have a plan to launch.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Launch? by nomorecwrd · · Score: 1

      Yes, actually, They're planning to plan a launch.

  7. Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    platinum and gold have practical uses. it would freak out the goldbugs though if it became financially feasible to get them from space and to land them.

    Gold?? Who's suggesting getting gold from asteroids?

    On Earth, gold veins are produced by aqueous processes. You wouldn't expect that on asteroids.

    Platinum, and platinum-group metals, on the other hand-- these are siderophiles, and hence depleted in the Earth's crust. Good elements to look for in asteroids-- in fact, iridium is the very signature of an asteroid impact.

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Some meteorites are almost a solid hunk of metal (mostly iron-nickel), and some small asteroids are probably the same (broken pieces from a differentiated larger asteroid). But you're right, they don't have big veins of gold or platinum, which need some kind of hydrothermal or other system to concentrate them to economically useful amounts whether it is in veins or more finely disseminated. There's plenty of evidence that larger asteroids do have or did have hydrothermal systems that were active (there is hydrothermal alteration in some meteorites), and sometimes these larger asteroids have been broken up into smaller pieces that might be recoverable, but I don't know of any meteorites that have economically notable concentrations of gold or platinum group elements. In the latter case, meteorites do have on average higher concentrations of platinum group metals than crustal rocks on the Earth, but we're still talking pretty low concentrations overall, not big, obvious nuggets of the stuff. And high concentrations are what you're going to need to make recovering this stuff and bringing it back to Earth *remotely* economic. More likely, the only economic value would be to use the stuff in space, where you can obtain materials to build things that don't have to be lifted out of the huge gravity well that the Earth represents. As others have pointed out, you aren't going to make significant money for long by selling this stuff as a novelty item.

    2. Re:Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      earth is kind of unique in terms of gold because of our catastrophic geological history, where we got whacked by another planet (about mars sized).
      We ended up getting heavy metals spread much more evenly throughout our rock strata. In terms of mineral wealth, earth is probably really high on the chart.

    3. Re:Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      the summary was suggesting that.

      expecting and finding are two different things though... which is I suppose why the first part is surveying. my point was entirely just that it has to be something of practical use they're going to bring down, novelty items wouldn't bring a return on the money.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by wcoenen · · Score: 1

      On Earth, gold veins are produced by aqueous processes. You wouldn't expect that on asteroids. Platinum, and platinum-group metals, on the other hand-- these are siderophiles, and hence depleted in the Earth's crust. Good elements to look for in asteroids

      Um, gold is also one of the siderophile elements.

    5. Re:Not gold [Re:collectables have a limit.] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

      On Earth, gold veins are produced by aqueous processes. You wouldn't expect that on asteroids.
      Platinum, and platinum-group metals, on the other hand-- these are siderophiles, and hence depleted in the Earth's crust. Good elements to look for in asteroids

      Um, gold is also one of the siderophile elements.

      OK, point.

      Nevertheless, asteroidal compositions (well, meteoritic compositions, assumed to be indicative of asteroids) have significantly more platinum and palladium than gold, and hydrothermal processes concentrate gold into conveniently mineable veins on Earth, but probably not on asteroids.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  8. All ingredients for a spectacular fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Planetary Resources wants to mine asteroids for their sweet, sweet minerals and make a business of it. The sparky little company has been writ up here on Slashdot numerous times. With the backing of such billionaires as Eric Schmidt, Larry Page, James Cameron, and many others, and such luminaries as major NASA project managers, engineers and scientists, you have to think they might have a good shot at it. Recently they picked up a huge engineering, procurement and construction partner: Bechtel.

    Lots of egos, lots of money, lots of people who are used to outsourcing and no cost control. I predict a brilliant crash in a few years and a vacuum that will take a while to be filled. Most likely by nimble entities which will focus on hard work instead of press releases.

    1. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I agree it will collapse. I don't agree that other people will fill the void. Asteroid mining is so delusional and useless it's just a vanity project.

      Any technology you come up with to automatically and magically get minerals from rocks in space you can apply right here minus the rocket and delay in transit.

      It's dead before it even begins.

    2. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No-one in their right mind is going to mine asteroids in space and bring the materials down to Earth, unless you really do find Unobtainium out there. We'd be mining them in space to use the materials in space, which is why it doesn't make much sense today to anyone other than billionaires with money to burn, but probably will in a few decades.

      If we did really, really need asteroid resources on Earth, we'd just crash them in a remote area and mine them on the ground.

    3. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "We'd be mining them in space to use the materials in space, "

      Speaking of not being in your right mind... What possible use would raw minerals have in space? We are just not a space-faring species. We are a upper atmosphere floating species with some radio transponders in geo orbit.

    4. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by 0123456 · · Score: 1

      Speaking of not being in your right mind... What possible use would raw minerals have in space?

      Uh, building stuff.

      We are just not a space-faring species.

      Yet.

      Which is why I said this is currently only of interest to billionaires with money to burn.

    5. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by DougOtto · · Score: 1

      Which is why it doesn't have to work. You live the good life for a few years, off of someone else's VC, and then declare that it's not viable. You close up shop and move on to the next opportunity.

      --
      Solving Unix problems since 1989...
    6. Re:All ingredients for a spectacular fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      L Ron Hubard went to Venus a few decades ago and discovered that the surface of the planet was cold. He also spent some time floating around the Van Allen belts.

  9. Prices by Jiro · · Score: 1

    The first sale of extraterrestrial asteroid bits will go for a lot. But the market for those is smaller than for gold or platinum and will quickly be saturated. Even the twentieth bit probably won't go for more than gold.

    Furthermore, many space enthusiasts would want such a sample for what it symbolizes. So a collectible sample that is a gimmick rather than the start of a sustained exercise in space exploration that produces things other than just collectible samples may not sell for as much.

    1. Re:Prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if it is the collectable piece of rock symbolizing the start of human-initiated asteroid bombardment of our own planet with the profit motive of selling collectable pieces of rock?

    2. Re:Prices by Earthquake+Retrofit · · Score: 1

      Have you read 'The Man Who Sold The Moon' by Robert Heinlein? That worked out all right.

      --
      Fifty years of Yippie! 1968-2018
    3. Re:Prices by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Crap, now you have me searching my bookshelves, I know I have that...

    4. Re:Prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://silentbluejay.tumblr.com/

    5. Re:Prices by kermidge · · Score: 1

      If they did happen to find easily-gotten gold, or rich enough ore that would need smelting, one thing that could increase the collectors' item value would be to strike coins; it'd still be a one-off, but would bring a better price.

      As others have pointed out, the real value of getting metals form ore in orbit would be to build stuff in orbit. Offhand, the early uses are few - using metals for structure for low-g pharmaceuticals manufacture and for solar power sats. The obvious drawback is that you have to have industrial tools in place to do so - and they'd have to come up the gravity well. Would take a good-sized money spigot to set it all up, and there's the rub. Unless they find unobtanium, payback would be lengthy. Could be a scam, but I don't see Bechtel coming in unless they're partners in that also.

      I used to think the solar power sattelites as kind of obvious, but now I wonder, cuz if it's such a great idea, one might think the Saudis would be into it. They know their oil is going to run out and about all that'll be left of value to their nation is Mecca.

      (For a nice quick read find "Lime's Crisis", by Ronald Bass, that includes the Saudi scenario. Would have made a good movie.)

    6. Re:Prices by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Forgot to add:

      Somebody may have mentioned this, but the survey phase will be helpful to existing efforts to catalog Earth-crossing asteroids. It's easy enough to tot up the expense column. But how do you assess value if they find one that will hit unless we deflect it.?

  10. Not Practical at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not practical at all, if the robotic mining of asteroids was even somewhat reasonable, Why would the Anunnaki have gone to all the trouble of terraforming the Earth planet and then genetically engineering a slave race to mine it ?

    Duh

  11. Leave those asteroids in space by stewsters · · Score: 1

    There is not really a lot of profit in bringing raw materials back down to Earth, considering the costs.

    What I think you guys are missing is how awesome it would be to smelt metals in space and then 3d print them into spacecraft that is already in orbit. Its far more efficient than launching that full weight. The cost of those spacecraft (already launched) would be worth their weight in gold.

    Whatever components you could not build in space could be sent up in cargo rockets, with much less weight than the whole thing together. The power to melt the metal could be generated from atomic batteries and solar panels. The material would be more brittle than our current metal, but satellites can be more brittle if they are already in space than if they have to survive the acceleration of a rocket launch. Reduced weight also means fuel savings for long distance travels.

    1. Re:Leave those asteroids in space by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      The power to melt the metal could be generated from atomic batteries and solar panels.

      Or a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight until the focus is hot enough.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:Leave those asteroids in space by Electricity+Likes+Me · · Score: 1

      The power to melt the metal could be generated from atomic batteries and solar panels.

      Or a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight until the focus is hot enough.

      This. People forget frequently that space is a very different environment to Earth - no convection means that whatever gets hot, stays hot, a hell of a lot longer then it does down here.

      To that end though, the idea that nothing mined in space can be profitably returned to Earth is hardly a reliable observation at the moment either. The only thing we know is the capital costs are large but that says nothing about scalability once the initial spend and research is done.

    3. Re:Leave those asteroids in space by That_Dan_Guy · · Score: 1

      Exactly! I do not understand why people are wasting their time writing about bringing this stuff back down the gravity well. We've got plenty of it here. What we don't have is any of it up there!

      They'll make money from the volatiles (read FUEL) and selling it to satellite operators. Extending the life of satellite so they don't have to launch more would save these operators money and make Planetary Resources the money to keep the lights on until they are finished building a whole industrial complex and colonies from self-replicating robots/3-d printers.

  12. To Fallujah and Beyond! by nightcats · · Score: 1

    Oh Bechtel! Yeah, they did SO well in Iraq, why not let them loose in space? What could possibly go wrong?

    --
    Development is programmable; Discovery is not programmable. (Fuller)
  13. Good God, man! GOOD GOD! by Un+pobre+guey · · Score: 1

    Some talk has been made of selling what are uncommon terrestrial minerals like gold and platinum, refined on orbit and deorbited at great expense as a business plan, but frankly that's absurd.

    Are you crazy? Are you aware that this isSlashdot? That is pure unmitigated heresy around here! We don't want facts or lucid, rational arguments! We wan t space opera full of hot female astronauts!

    1. Re:Good God, man! GOOD GOD! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      We wan t space opera full of hot female astronauts!

      Oh, hell, I forgot hot female astronauts, DOH! How about a hot female Martian?

  14. mmmm by RedHackTea · · Score: 1

    Those sweet, sweet ass minerals! So sweet.

    --
    The G
  15. "ought to" "Should draw" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These are not terms you put in a business plan. Their business is technology, and soon to be LEO photography, but selling mined asteroids? They have a long way to go before that becomes more than a niche source of revenue.

  16. Armageddon Waiting To Happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some error will send one crashing to Earth. We will self-extinct. At least the dinos were not responsible for their own extinction.

  17. Well, which is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A reasonable fee or a fair price?

  18. Do I have to..... by Tom+the+Piper's+Son · · Score: 0

    see this every fukin' day

  19. CIA in space ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0

    Bechtel has a lot of ties with the CIA

    Is this "asteroid mining" thing being used by CIA to go space exploration, in a big way ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  20. Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up, Paul.

  21. Re:SLASHDOT IS BEING SUED... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

    * POOR SHOWING TROLLS , & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!

    Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

    Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

    Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

    If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

    I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

    Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

    Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

    I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

    If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

    You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his ba

  22. De-Orbit? No. That's stupid. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    De-orbiting shit is dumb as hell. Raw material is worth a lot more in space. If it can be "mulched" and refined in space then you can simply use it IN SPACE to make more spacecraft. The cost of getting things out of this gravity well greatly increases the value of any usable materials NOT on Earth. De-orbiting them devalues the material greatly by re-adding the gravity tax.

    That said, I can see that since they might not have the infrastructure to process or utilize the first bits of asteroids anywhere but down here on Earth, and that the rarity and collectible nature of the space stuff would offset the gravity tax, so for their initial proof-of-concept trials it sounds like a decent idea. However, mining asteroids for Earth-bound materials is not a wise long term goal. Once you start building things in space you'll be kicking yourself for every ounce of usable material you wasted by throwing it at Earth -- Except if it's stuff that we truly don't have down here in great quantities. Gold?! Pah! We've got whole buildings full of the stuff just sitting around, not even being used, not really valuable, I mean we gold-leaf wooden signs and picture frames and even Ethernet terminals, or just wear the damn stuff like it's cheap decorative jewelery. Diamonds? Don't make me laugh, they're so plentiful that the diamond dealers buy up every last bit and sit on em just to drive the price up. Make a space stream of these goods and the local markets will manipulate the prices to bring your costs just under enough to be profitable -- then raise 'em back up when you're bankrupt.

    Eventually the space materials economy will pick-up and you'll lose your edge as the first to market in orbital construction materials. It's a dumb move to waste any temporary advantage therein: The stuff you mined will only go down in value as time drags on...

    Hell, work your way up to some big uninteresting iron rocks. Yeah, we have big rocks down here, but they're not up there. Guess how much a mobile orbiting gravity generator would be worth if you needed to use one as a gravity tug or cue-ball to save Earth from a life-threatening asteroid? You would have the "defense" budget of the entire world at your disposal -- Way more valuable than a chunk of space gold.

  23. private industry lead way to asteroid retrieval? by k6mfw · · Score: 1

    Going through some old website bookmarks, I found this comment about private groups instead of govt going to Mars from imipak (edited below to show key point) and I have agreement with this. It seems setting up infrastructure to mine asteroids by governments seems logical but others think private industry should lead the way. Maybe there are holes in this comment but it does raise discussion regarding who will send a person to Mars, of if current NASA plans to retrieve an asteroid are squelched by budget cutters. Link of original posting below.

    "The added twist in the tale that was missed is that Werner von Braun quit NASA because of the direction it was going. "

    "The Russian space shuttle... died from funding starvation due to idiotic arms races."

    "This is not the way to run a space program and really does demonstrate that neither side has any real interest in such a program except as it furthers their military objectives. Us British are no better - the rocket program and the HOTOL program were both scrapped by hostile governments."

    "I have thought for some time that if there were to be a manned mission to Mars, it would be by a mix of enthusiasts and academia, not by governments or corporations. At this point, I'm more certain than ever that my prognosis is correct."

    from http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/mar/13/yuri-gagarin-first-space-korolev#start-of-comments

    --
    mfwright@batnet.com
  24. Why de-orbit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It costs a lot per kg to get stuff into orbit, and they build stuff for orbit out of light materials because of that. Why not build stuff out of materials already in orbit - maybe it can even be stronger. Maybe build factories for stuff that's easier to build in orbit (stuff that is more easily built in free-fall, for example).

    Seems like a bad idea to de-orbit the materials.

  25. Becoming senile? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0