Slashdot Mirror


'Space Vikings' Spark (Unfounded) NASA Waste Inquiry

sciencehabit writes "For Ved Chirayath, a graduate student and amateur fashion photographer, a photo project that involved NASA researchers dressed as Vikings was just a creative way to promote space science. 'I started this project hoping maybe one day some kid will look at it and say, 'I want to work for NASA,' ' says Chirayath, a student at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, who also works nearby at NASA's Ames Research Center. He never suspected that his fanciful image would put him in the crosshairs of a government waste investigation triggered by a senior U.S. senator." The project was funded by an outside art grant. The best part: the investigation into the non-existent waste probably cost more than the "waste" would have were it funded by NASA in the first place.

26 of 147 comments (clear)

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. We can't have this... by PrimeNumber · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This money could be better used for banker bonuses like our bailout money was.

  3. Re:Most confusing headline ever by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    No problems parsing the headline. However, my twisted mental faculties imagined things much more entertaining than what eventually played out.....

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  4. Re:Huh? by ArcadeX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The best part: the investigation into the non-existent waste probably cost more than the "waste" would have were it funded by NASA in the first place.

    What kind of logic is that? Does the OP have knowledge of the future?

    Doesn't have to, you can look at previous investigations and extrapolate. You'd be suprised how much 'simple' paperwork cost the government where investigations are involved. I used to be a Government contractor, seeing my taxes wasted first hand made each paycheck withholding sting a little more.

    --
    An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
  5. *Grassley* is complaining about waste? by spasm · · Score: 5, Informative

    "This year [2008], the government-watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste named Grassley the fourth biggest GOP earmarker. The senator has proven himself a champion spender of other people’s money." http://spectator.org/archives/2008/06/10/chuck-grassley-king-of-pork

    1. Re:*Grassley* is complaining about waste? by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They are waste. They are basically ways to buy votes. Bills should be voted on for their merits, not because if you vote "yes" you'll get a bridge in your district.

    2. Re:*Grassley* is complaining about waste? by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are waste. They are basically ways to buy votes. Bills should be voted on for their merits, not because if you vote "yes" you'll get a bridge in your district.

      It really depends then on what bill the earmark is attached too. There is generally a big omnibuss spending bill. Earmarks on it are just about deciding what bridges should be built. Earmarks on federal law, wars, supreme court justices are unethical.

  6. Re:How do you know in advance? by joe_frisch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A little fun can boost moral and increase efficiency far more than the loss of time. You will notice that most companies with knowledge workers take time for parties, outings etc.

    The real waste in large organizations isn't from spending on photos, silly movies, or conferences in nice locations. The big waste is from spending on unneeded projects, or in starting large projects that are then canceled.

  7. Nonsense by Jiro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Claiming that the waste investigation costs more than the loss from the waste is meaningless. In order to see if the cost is worth it, you can't compare the waste that was caught to the cost of the investigation. You have to compare the waste that there would be without any investigation, to the cost of the investigation. As investigation discourages waste, the latter number is larger than the former number.

    1. Re:Nonsense by sootman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > Claiming that the waste investigation costs more
      > than the loss from the waste is meaningless.

      Sometimes, but not in this case. The first question should have been "What?!? Space vikings?!? Who paid for this crap? ... Oh, not us? OK then." The "investigation" should have been 1 or 2 phone calls.

      Rule #1: Verify that your premise and assumptions are correct before proceeding. If you go into something thinking "This seems like a waste of tax dollars!", your first questions MUST be "Was it paid for with tax dollars?" To not do so is... wasteful.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  8. In light of IRS... by alta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In light of the IRS making Star Trek training videos I really don't see any problem with digging into all Government entities searching for waste. Glad they didn't find it here, but I'm also glad the checked.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    1. Re:In light of IRS... by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're a fool swept up in Republican lies and propaganda. That video was made while training in the use of their new video facilities and cost them next to nothing.

      --
      The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    2. Re:In light of IRS... by Guru80 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Except for the issue of costs. Those hours spent contacting everyone, filling out paperwork and digging around for ways to fire someone cost far more than a few photos in costumes paid for by an art grant earmarked specifically for this kind of thing. It really could have been as simple as 3 phone calls.

      Call 1: Head of the department the participants work in - "Nope, wasn't during scheduled meeting times, cost us none of our money and I'm a freakin space viking! One guy made us sound cooler than anything you guys have done since the moon missions".

      Call 2: Photographer - "No, I didn't interfere with their work and it cost you nothing. I have a grant to make NASA look awesome and sound freakin badass! Space Vikings! Just in case here is the number to verify freakin vikings in freakin space money"

      Call 3: Grant people - "Yes we gave photographer a grant to take pictures of space vikings, glad to see you aren't living up to your reputation as one of the biggest wasters in congress with your sensible approach to verifying the facts and not ordering a full blown investigation into the space viking thing".

    3. Re:In light of IRS... by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's see. They could be making internal training videos, saving money on training new hires or adjusting old workers to new rules. They could be making public instructional videos, saving money by reducing the number of mistakes made by the public. They could be making any number of different videos that could more than pay for the paultry $60,000 cost of the facility.

      --
      The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
  9. IRS Star Trek Video by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think they are just checking that NASA isn't wasnting money like the IRS did. The IRS used govemerment funds to create Star Trek videos with upper managment in them.

    1. Re:IRS Star Trek Video by TheNastyInThePasty · · Score: 4, Informative

      That video was made while training in the use of their new video facilities and cost them next to nothing. Try watching something besides Fox News.

      --
      The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
    2. Re:IRS Star Trek Video by Agent.Nihilist · · Score: 4, Informative

      The video was made as a training exercise for the new facilities. The studio wasn't built to do the star trek video, the star trek video was done to train people for the studio.
      In other words they used the existing training budget to do a fun exercise instead of filming 70's style PSAs that would never see the light of day.

    3. Re:IRS Star Trek Video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They paid for the video facilities to make internal videos for years to come. In training the staff to use the equipment that was purchased for training videos, they chose to do something that isn't as dry as teaching the tax code.

      The programming equivalent is complaining how much that 'hello world' program cost to make because it requires a 1 grand computer to make.

  10. Re:Most confusing headline ever by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Interesting

    *sigh*

    'Space Vikings' Spark (Unfounded) NASA Waste Inquiry

    {Adjectival Noun + Noun} | Verb | {(Adjective) + Adjectival Noun + Adjectival Noun + Noun}

    Subject | Verb | Object

    I can tell the US education system has gone to shit when I'm reduced to defending Slashdot editors' word choices by diagramming sentences for dunderheads who were allowed to sleep all the way through 8th grade.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  11. Re:6 offices by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Informative

    Grassley has a history of sending drooling stupid letters full of dipshit questions to NASA administrators. Here he's character-assinating the director of the Ames Research Center. Here he's making shit up about NASA and Google doing something nefarious. Here is an account of him badgering them about procurement practices.

    Note that all of them contain demands for detailed histories, rationales and future plans, all to be delivered with two weeks.

    Maybe this grandstanding fucktard should start writing similar letters to the Secretary of Defense. I hear they get a slightly larger portion of the budget pie than NASA does.

  12. Re:Most confusing headline ever by sjames · · Score: 4, Funny

    Funny thing, I didn't even have to read TFA to know it was a Republican congresscritter.

    Correct response to Grassley: (in baby talk) "who's a braying ass? YOU're a braying ass, yes you are!

  13. Re:Depressing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It is not just NASA, but extends to other science work under federal grants. When I was an undergraduate and working for free for a project to get some experience, I spent some downtime creating a much nicer website and some literature for non-science types to understand the project. The head of the project was scared to put any of it up, as the grant didn't allow for outreach and he thought it looked like it was too well done or too much time was spent on it. So they stuck with a minimalistic website that didn't have much more than a publication list and staff listing. I've also since then see others warned of what they do on their free time if too associated with a project (not warned as in reprimanded and/or having their job threatened, but warned as in "You don't want to get into the drama that can produce.") Not all projects are like that, as some have outreach efforts, with slight funding or just completely based on volunteer work.

  14. Re:Most confusing headline ever by QuantumLeaper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know what you mean, I guessed it was a Republican who was complaining about waste. The only time Republicans complain about waste is when a Democrat has the Office of President, otherwise they are the largest wasters if money around.

  15. Re:How do you know in advance? by sjames · · Score: 4, Informative

    It is like a general from the pentagon making a special flight to Okinawa to see if PFC Perkins pilfered a stapler.

    The inquiry will easily cost more than the photos would have if NASA had paid for them.

    Of course the senator has been called the king of pork on more than one occasion. He probably would have been fione with it as long as they had the photos developed in Iowa.

  16. Training videos by Firethorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This reminds me of the CDC's Zombie preparedness memo.

    Some people bitched about the 'waste of funds' and such. The CDC pointed out that from their metrics it was viewed OVER 100X as much as their normal releases, for approximately equal preparation cost. Plus, well, if you're prepared for zombies, you're prepared about as well as you can be for many natural and unnatural disasters. The advice in the release was still standard disease/disaster prep stuff.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  17. They violated NASA procedures by Plazmid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Clearly they have violated Standard NASA Ames Procedures for dealing with this sort of thing.

    They failed to fill out a both the DARC-820AD -- 'Identifying a Barbarian Attack' and FF-1066AD -- 'Report of Viking Raid' forms.