Final Mars One Numbers Are In, Over 200,000 People Applied

I would have... by ackthpt · 2013-09-09 06:56 · Score: 3, Funny

But there's no beer on Mars.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar

Re:I would have... by BasilBrush · 2013-09-09 07:00 · Score: 4, Funny

But plenty of nougat, caramel and chocolate.
Re:I would have... by ColdWetDog · 2013-09-09 07:00 · Score: 1

I'm pretty sure this is being styled as a BYOB party.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:I would have... by rwise2112 · 2013-09-09 07:18 · Score: 1

I think you're wrong.

--

"For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert"
Re:I would have... by TWiTfan · 2013-09-09 07:23 · Score: 4, Funny

Well, at least the hard part is over now. Now all we have to do is build a rocket and living quarters to get there and stay.

--
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Re:I would have... by NatasRevol · 2013-09-09 07:55 · Score: 1

Bring Your Own Body.

--
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Re:I would have... by fritsd · 2013-09-09 08:22 · Score: 2

yet.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neoUi4poCXI (WARNING: advertisement)

--
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Re:I would have... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:32 · Score: 0

This will turn out to be Space Cadets all over again.
Re:I would have... by tom17 · 2013-09-09 08:50 · Score: 1, Redundant

And Wensleydale cheese.
Or.. wait a sec, did I sign up for the wrong interplanetary settlement mission? CRAP!!!
Re:I would have... by DarkOx · 2013-09-09 09:44 · Score: 1

There is no beer now, but you gota look at it this way. What is the first thing any respectable settlers have done throughout history? They figure out how to make beer, wine, or some other spirit from the available food stuffs and materials; that's what. There are good odds that if any of the get to Mars at all one of these applicants will be the first Martian Brewmeister.

--
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Re: I would have... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:31 · Score: 0

Bring Your Own Brewery
Re:I would have... by msk · 2013-09-09 11:26 · Score: 2

Mars needs IPAs.
Re: I would have... by chromeronin799 · 2013-09-09 12:01 · Score: 1

Vacuum still 8)
Re: I would have... by kelarius · 2013-09-09 12:17 · Score: 1

I think it needs a MPA more.

--
Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
Re:I would have... by VortexCortex · 2013-09-09 22:26 · Score: 1

Well, at least the hard part is over now. Now all we have to do is build a rocket and living quarters to get there and stay.
I agree. Once we've proved you can safely get to mars colony, it's all downhill from there. Just FYI: Don't be on the second ship out. We already know what fate the B Ark ship will serve...
...and I wouldn't wish that on some poor unsuspecting planet. Our ultimate answer might not be correct, but the cycle of iteration must end with us!
Re:I would have... by abbiege1 · 2013-09-09 22:56 · Score: -1, Flamebait

as Michael answered I am shocked that a student can earn $5030 in a few weeks on the internet. .......> www.jobs60.com
Re:I would have... by rwv · 2013-09-10 00:16 · Score: 1

TFS shoud say "wanting to be amongst the first human to die on Mars" instead of "the first human settlers on Mars" because they are going to have significant problems with having enough food, Martian storms, and maintaining livable temperatures (though, I'll give them the benefit of doubt that breathable air and water are problems that have largely been solved by research on the International Space Station).

coincidentally by bitt3n · 2013-09-09 06:56 · Score: 4, Funny

all of them are mothers-in-law.

--
how many pairs of boxer shorts should you own?

Re:coincidentally by ackthpt · 2013-09-09 06:58 · Score: 0

all of them are mothers-in-law.
And quite suspiciously the applications are signed in handwriting resembling that of their sons-in-law.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:05 · Score: 1

If only they could spare room for a comparatively smaller number of politicians.
Perhaps in the glovebox with promises of rehydration on landing...
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:05 · Score: 0

with a significant number of politicians, lawyers and lobbyists. They have apparently nobly accepted a one-way ticket to help keep costs down.
Re:coincidentally by Longjmp · 2013-09-09 07:05 · Score: 4, Funny

Not all, the rest are telephone sanitizers.

--
There are fewer illiterates than people who can't read.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:40 · Score: 0

As long as there are no crying babies and people kicking my seat on the flight, I am okay with that.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:45 · Score: -1

Well, I did hear that Mars Needs Moms
Re:coincidentally by girlintraining · 2013-09-09 08:46 · Score: -1

Not all, the rest are telephone sanitizers.
Joke all you want... this says something; There's over 200k people in western countries everywhere that are willing to die to make a political statement on someone else's behalf. Oh, I know... you think Mars has nothing to do with ... 'that'.
But anyone who's willing to take a one-way trip and never see their family or friends again... is exactly what 'that' is all about.

--
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
Re:coincidentally by scarboni888 · 2013-09-09 08:50 · Score: 1

I almost wish I knew what you were going on about.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:14 · Score: 0

you underestimate the number of terminally ill people in this world
Re:coincidentally by Dayze!Confused · 2013-09-09 09:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

I believe we are all terminally ill

--
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:02 · Score: 0

Us knowing what she's going on about is irrelevant. She'll get up modded anyways.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:35 · Score: 0

Bullshit. All this says is a bunch of inexperienced, excitable kids *say* that they want to go now, but once the reality of it all sets in will back out from going or end up going crazy on Mars. This project is doomed unless they can get some real hardcore, Robinson Crusoe frontiersmen types out there.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:38 · Score: 0

I am pretty sure it's a he that either likes masquerading around as a she or wants to be one. The name gives it away.
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 15:56 · Score: 0

Huh?
Re:coincidentally by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 17:49 · Score: 0

I have a son, so i wouldn't go now. But earlier I would have been the first in line. Even if it meant I'd never get back, and risk dying in a vacuum. To be among the ones that set their foot on soil of another planet. How cool is that?
Re:coincidentally by philip.paradis · 2013-09-09 21:07 · Score: 2

I'll wager the people signing up for this endeavor assign no particular political value whatsoever to the mission. In stark contrast, politicians make careers of twisting the heartfelt dreams and acts of others to convince the masses that said acts represent this or that "cause" that bears little or no resemblance to the original act.
You dare to claim insight into the minds of 200k people and distill their motives into a neat little cup to suit your own whims. You must be a politician.
Mod parent troll. Should the /. admins elect to introduce a "-1 professional politician" option while this story is still open for moderation, please use the more fitting option instead.

--
Write failed: Broken pipe
Re:coincidentally by home-electro.com · 2013-09-10 01:48 · Score: 1

How cool is that?
Better question is, how is that cool? You are the first to be on that planet for a brief moment only. After that there will be longest end of your life. It's like prison for life with no chance of parole. You don't have to travel that far to be the first one to do something pointless.
Re:coincidentally by philip.paradis · 2013-09-18 16:57 · Score: 1

I could tell by the pixels.

--
Write failed: Broken pipe

Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 06:58 · Score: -1, Troll

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.

Re:Can't we just send them all? by ackthpt · 2013-09-09 06:59 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.
Sadly, those we would most like to send, are probably the least likely to apply.

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Manfre · 2013-09-09 07:01 · Score: 1

I'm guessing you think the space transport should look like this. http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111029002561/en.futurama/images/7/75/Lynn.png
Re:Can't we just send them all? by BasilBrush · 2013-09-09 07:04 · Score: 4, Insightful

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.
They are people with "the right stuff". While the Apollo astronauts knew the plan was to come back, they must have been ready to face a one way trip, as the probability of that was, or must a least have seemed high.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by fahrbot-bot · 2013-09-09 07:08 · Score: 0

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.
Sadly, those we would most like to send, are probably the least likely to apply.
I understand there will be a need for telephone sanitizers on mars...

--
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SecurityGuy · 2013-09-09 07:11 · Score: 4, Insightful

Really? Why? Every single one of us is going to die of something, someday. I didn't apply, but thinking about it now, it's tempting. Getting to stand on another planet? Maybe even breaking ground for those who will come later? Really, that's kind of awesome. It's fine to say that maybe someday the technology will exist to make this safer, or even routine, but I'm pretty certain to die of something else before that happens.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by TWiTfan · 2013-09-09 07:27 · Score: 1

We could always offer to commute any death row inmates' sentences if they'll agree to go. But I think they'll probably catch on to the ruse pretty quickly, not to mention the damage they might cause when they realize the real implications of a "one-way trip" when it comes to Mars.

--
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:33 · Score: 0

They're just harmless delusional nutters. We should send the Assads of the world first and kill all their offspring.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Synerg1y · 2013-09-09 07:33 · Score: 1

IT comes down to are you the experiment, or the experimenter, in the case of these applicants, they're the former.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:36 · Score: -1, Troll

Why don't you become the first to stand barefoot and live in the caldera of a volcano? I mean we all have to die of something someday. I guess in your world that means any stupid thing you choose to do is as good as doing intelligent things?
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SirGarlon · 2013-09-09 07:37 · Score: 1

Only if excessive credulity now counts as a virtue. The Mars One project has a very poor explanation how they are going to finance the construction and launch of the rocket, and none at all how they are going to finance all the testing they claim they'll do.

--
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Frosty+Piss · 2013-09-09 07:43 · Score: 4, Insightful

They are people with "the right stuff". While the Apollo astronauts knew the plan was to come back, they must have been ready to face a one way trip, as the probability of that was, or must a least have seemed high.
The difference being that this trip IS a "one way" trip.

--
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:56 · Score: 0

Most people want to live a long life. People who have already lived a long life are not necessarily the best-suited for this mission. Ditto for people with terminal diseases, or the suicidal.
Personally, I don't understand people who don't want to live forever, but I understand and accept there are people like that.
Probably won't even be a particularly pleasant death, unless you cheat and suicide early, depriving the Earth of knowledge that could be gained in your final hours (the attitude that this is okay would likely be screened against).
Re:Can't we just send them all? by He+Who+Has+No+Name · 2013-09-09 08:16 · Score: 4, Interesting

What, they'll build Australia 2: Outback Harder?
Re:Can't we just send them all? by richlv · 2013-09-09 08:28 · Score: 1

that was a stupid comment, because going to mars is way more intelligent than what 90% of earth population is doing

--
Rich
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SecurityGuy · 2013-09-09 08:44 · Score: 3, Interesting

I want to live forever. Or at least long enough that I don't want to anymore. The problem is, that's not an option. When I was young(er) and (more) naive, I believed that maybe we finally live in a time where technology and medicine would advance fast enough that I wouldn't have to suffer death, at least not for a long, long time. It's become apparent that that's not the case. Why not do something fantastic before the inevitable?
Re:Can't we just send them all? by aaaaaaargh! · 2013-09-09 08:49 · Score: 0

Even if that means I'm stupid, I can't wait to get the popcorn and see people like you die on Mars. :-)
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SecurityGuy · 2013-09-09 08:55 · Score: 4, Insightful

Why? People die doing things all the time now. Climbing mountains. Racing cars. Swimming. Running. Sleeping.
I don't know, I think I'd be chuckling to myself thinking yep, I'm dying, just like every one of you schlubs will. But I'm doing it on Mars.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by richlv · 2013-09-09 09:05 · Score: 1

i'm not applying, because i kinda like it here. but belittling those who did sounds damn shortsighted

--
Rich
Re:Can't we just send them all? by aaaaaaargh! · 2013-09-09 09:08 · Score: 0

Sure, if you want to die on Mars, go ahead and chuckle while you suffocate. I'm not against suicide. As long as participants realize that it's really just for TV entertainment, that's okay.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:29 · Score: 0

Have you watched any of the Mars One videos? Most people applying there are complete morons.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:38 · Score: 0

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.
Sadly, those we would most like to send, are probably the least likely to apply.
The tinfoil hat in me says that some 200k people have just disqualified themselves from being considered in the International Lottery for seats aboard the secret "Ark" the Illuminati has been building in preparation for the arrival of the doomsday comet which they have been suppressing from public knowledge.
Or maybe I had a few too many beers and fell asleep watching crappy sci-fi last night.
But to be serious for a moment, the sad truth is that most people who are the most eager to go are exactly the wrong personality type to cram into a small can for several years on end. These are mostly people who want to get away from other people, or have an adventurous spirit. The former would find out quickly that far from being an escape, you are forced into incredibly intimate relationship with the other passengers. As for the later, you're going to spend most of your time finding ways to deal with boredom... it won't be some grand adventure with excitement and thrills, it'll be years of tedium with a few minor points of excitement here and there.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SecurityTheatre · 2013-09-09 09:39 · Score: 2

Actually, in surveys of REAL ASTRONAUTS, a number of them have said very clearly that to be the first team to go to Mars, they would willingly make it a one-way trip.
The tools that applied are hardly qualified to operate a spacecraft. I would want to select someone that is in *absurdly* good shape and has the willpower to do it themselves. I would want someone who has already been subject to high-gee training, and has a low propensity for motion sickness.
i would want to choose someone with an extremely high amount of willpower and who is very well educated in both the general sciences as well as mechanically inclined.
Yes, many of these things can be trained, but the TYPE OF PEOPLE we want going on this trip are those who do these things anyway, because that's WHO THEY ARE.
That said, there are many many very qualified people within the military, NASA and other occupations that would do it AND are qualified to do it.
It must be a voluntary process, obviously, but I think there would be no shortage of volunteers, honestly.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:51 · Score: 0

Why? People die doing things all the time now. Climbing mountains. Racing cars. Swimming. Running. Sleeping.
I don't know, I think I'd be chuckling to myself thinking yep, I'm dying, just like every one of you schlubs will. But I'm doing it on Mars.
Yes but it's not often you get to watch a tin can full of overzealous and underinformed people murder and eat each other on time-delay TV.
Because unlike all those examples you list, most of what is involved in "going to Mars" amounts to sitting on your ass trying to retain your sanity. IF they ever get there, sure maybe things will "pick up" a bit... but don't count on it.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:31 · Score: 0

Guaranteed suicide mission attracts a different sort of person than "mission with high risk".
Re:Can't we just send them all? by ackthpt · 2013-09-09 11:06 · Score: 1

I'm personally of the opinion that anyone with an inclination to volunteer to take what will invariably amount to a one-way trip to Mars based on the technology that we have so far is probably somebody that the world may be better off without.
Sadly, those we would most like to send, are probably the least likely to apply.
I understand there will be a need for telephone sanitizers on mars...
If only we hadn't sent off the Telephone Sanitizers I would have been in better health this past weekend. Well, never mind. Have to keep in top shape to do battle with that Star Goat ...

--

A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:24 · Score: 0

No to mention the fact that prospective "colonists" are highly unlikely to die of old age even if they arrive in one piece.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:45 · Score: 0

Getting to stand on another planet will be exciting for about the first 20 minutes. After that, the bleak, boring, intensely difficult struggle for mere survival will kick in and you'll wish you were back on Earth, having a fruity cocktail with scantily clad babes on some Caribbean beach.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by pluther · 2013-09-09 12:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

And then there are those of us who are well aware of the risks, and have no illusions about how "exciting" it would be. And have signed up anyway.
I'm someone with close friends, good family, and active social life, a couple of different fulfilling hobbies, and a steady career that I'm 15 years into and 20 years from retirement from.
And I signed up.
I began my application by listing a myriad different ways the mission could fail, from exploding on launch, to losing air on the way there, to crashing into the planet, to starving to death on the surface, to the most likely: the project running out of money before ever leaving the ground. These are not 200,000 delusional people. These are not 200,000 people who think they're signing up for a quick trip on the Millennium Falcon Many, if not most, of these people know what they're getting into, as much as it can be known at this point. And we've signed up, to go to Mars.
The project will probably fail. Simply because most ambitious projects fail.But some succeed. The probability of failure is not a reason not to be ambitious.
But why go? I can't speak for everyone who signed up. But for myself, the answer is simple. We have to go. We have to expand beyond our planet. Here's somebody trying to do something about it. And I can't pass up the opportunity to be part of it. 47 years ago today the words "To boldly go where no man has gone before" were first uttered in public. And no, you don't need to point out that the show was fiction. But the words meant something.
There are always people willing to go new places. And people willing to go with them.
Columbus wasn't alone on his ship to America. Shackleton had to turn down almost 5000 volunteers for his South Pole expedition. Going to Mars is an even bigger deal. I'm not surprised they got 200,000 applicants. And it's OK that you can't imagine wanting to go. I can't imagine *not* wanting to go.
And yeah, the project will likely fail. But even if it does, something will be learned. Something new will be gained. And eventually, someone will use those lessons and succeed. And I'd be glad to be part of one step of that process. That's why I sent in my application.

--
If the masses can keep you down, you're not the Ubermensch.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 17:36 · Score: 0

Personally, I don't understand people who don't want to live forever, but I understand and accept there are people like that.
Forever is a long time. Longer than any of us can comprehend, since life is clearly finite.
Do you really want to have to pay bills, eat, sleep, shit, drink, and feel pain *forever*?
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 20:17 · Score: 0

I've seen people die of old age, it's overrated.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by SlovakWakko · 2013-09-09 20:33 · Score: 1

Respect, man! I really hope the project will be a success, if for nothing else then for not giving another argument to those with no imagination, who consider funding space exploration just a waste of resources.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-10 02:57 · Score: 0

For the moment, it is a zero-way trip.
Re:Can't we just send them all? by robertinventor · 2013-09-10 05:44 · Score: 1

The problem is by failing you'd mess it up for everyone else, by contaminating Mars with Earth micro-organisms, you have no idea how valuable a Pristine Mars with probably independently evolved life is potentially for science and for humanity. If you could somehow colonize Mars with humans without bringing their micro-organisms along as well, but no-one knows a way to do that. There is a way around that too, to explore Mars telerobotically to start with. Why such a rush to land humans on the surface when the surface is cold as Antarctica, near vacuum, and far less habitable than the coldest driest deserts on Earth (the McMurdo dry valleys in Antarctica and the Atacama desert are both far more habitable for humans than Mars)? Is easier to supply and maintain a colony in orbit, the Molniya orbit is easier to get to in terms of delta v than the Moon. Then you can control telerobots on the surface instead. See: http://www.science20.com/robert_inventor/blog/ten_reasons_not_live_mars_great_place_explore-118531 See http://www.science20.com/robert_inventor039s_column/blog/how_valuable_pristine_mars_humanity_opinion_piece-115954

Salaried? by kaka.mala.vachva · 2013-09-09 07:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

Will these people get paid for the seven years they train? I'm in a pessimistic mood today, so I'm assuming that they will not actually reach Mars - just wondering what they will get for the seven years they put in.

Re:Salaried? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:25 · Score: 0

An experience of a life-time, and some controlled food and shelter. This is the most transformative health program available.
Re:Salaried? by Phroggy · 2013-09-09 13:45 · Score: 1

An experience of a life-time, and some controlled food and shelter. This is the most transformative health program available.
Which raises the question: will they still be willing to go die on Mars, after spending seven years turning their life around?

--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Re:Salaried? by khallow · 2013-09-09 14:23 · Score: 1

Which raises the question: will they still be willing to go die on Mars, after spending seven years turning their life around?
Some will, some won't. With that many applicants, you can pick a larger group than you need for the final mission precisely to account for people bowing out of the program.
Re:Salaried? by laejoh · 2013-09-10 00:55 · Score: 1

They'll get a t-shirt that reads "I put in seven years and all I got was a lousy t-shirt".

Of course the application wasn't free by ModernGeek · 2013-09-09 07:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

I believe the application fee was $35, so they have already raised a whopping $7 million that I assume will be leveraged for more publicity stunts in raising further money for the mission.

The main speciality of the Mars One project is fundraising and public relations, not space travel.

--
Sig: I stole this sig.

Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:22 · Score: 0

I doubt that mars one is going to ever happen, but in the event that it does, whoever does get selected will end up dying relatively quickly. The mission will with most certainty fail for the humans involved but will succeed for science.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:35 · Score: 0

Right... I'd love to see you back your statements with science tool.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:43 · Score: 0

@ $200k/lb that 7 million will pay for a medium sized dog, his favorite chew toy and a set of Google Glasses to record his last howl.
But wait! The pet industry is $50 billion/yr... could this be the start of a trend? I can see it now. Think of the publicity you could generate funding a short, $7 million Hollywood film called, "Fido Goes to Mars!"
Hey, stranger things have come out of product placement in movies... who would have thought that a chimpanzee and an astrologist could have launched a successful political career culminating with Nancy Reagan hosting parties for heads of state.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by hedwards · 2013-09-09 07:47 · Score: 4, Funny

I doubt they turned a profit on that. $35 probably barely covered the cost of reviewing the application.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · 2013-09-09 07:48 · Score: 4, Funny

No, too original. Needs a tie in to an exsiting franchise.
Beverly Hills Chihuahua 4: Stars on Mars

--
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Overzeetop · 2013-09-09 07:49 · Score: 3, Insightful

Wait...you think they actually reviewed the applications? They're likely scanned into a database for "future use".
I'm just jealous I didn't think of a stunt like this.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by hedwards · 2013-09-09 08:00 · Score: 1

Yes, because at this point they're still hoping to actually do this. So, somebody needed to review the applications. Sure, they might have made some profit on this, but it's not like they're getting to keep all that money. Which even if they did, the $7m or so would be a drop in the pool of funding needed to even try this.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:08 · Score: 0

If those publicity stunts involve swimming or diving, include me out because there is no water on Mars
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:43 · Score: 0

The cynical view would be that it isn't clear that they are anywhere near prepared for such a trip, in which case their expenses come to zero dollars.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:43 · Score: 0

No, they won't ever go anywhere. The entire program is disingenuous. Slashdot, stop giving these people free publicity. The more they get, the more damage their inevitable failure will do.
They have no engineers on staff. There are no feasibility studies, no technical documents, no explanation of how their tech will work. Also, apparently the public gets to choose who goes? Really? This isn't Survivor: Mars. Basically the entire program is PR and media people.
When pressed on any of these points, they fall apart (look up the Mars One AMA on Reddit). They claim they have "letters of intent" from SpaceX and a bunch of other contractors; apparently nobody told them that contractors are always happy for more business, but you actually need to give your contractor some specs at some point.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by ubungy · 2013-09-09 08:49 · Score: 2

The application fee was variable depending on location. Some were $35 some were much lower. Also, they didn't reach the goal of half of a million applicants. This put them below their forecast funds from applications. Sorry can't find source.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Kittenman · 2013-09-09 09:09 · Score: 1

I believe the application fee was $35, so they have already raised a whopping $7 million that I assume will be leveraged for more publicity stunts in raising further money for the mission. The main speciality of the Mars One project is fundraising and public relations, not space travel.
Agreed. It struck me as a reality show, rather than as a serious space mission (that's a mission into serious space).

--
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes" - Winston Churchill
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by notanalien_justgreen · 2013-09-09 09:44 · Score: 2

That's the point. They're NOT going to even try this. The whole organization is nothing more than an attempt to extract money from suckers. That's $7Million they can bank without barely lifting a finger.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by notanalien_justgreen · 2013-09-09 09:47 · Score: 4, Informative

I post this every time another MarsOne piece of fundraising comes up. So here goes again....
I really wish people would stop posting MarsOne propaganda. It's a scam, pure and simple. It's been pointed out time and time again that their team is primarily artists and PR people. Just look here for yourself:
http://www.mars-one.com/en/about-mars-one/team
Of the 7 people listed there's: an artist, an editor, a communication specialist, a communications director, and an MD. There's only 2 people who could conceivably have any expertise on getting to Mars.
They did an interview (AMA) on reddit and were torn apart:
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/ufb42/ama_i_am_founder_of_mars_one_sending_four_people/
They lack any coherent plan on how they're going to even test their technology, let alone actually get people to Mars. Stop looking towards entertainers to do what you know will require a massive engineering effort. These people are after free press and free money.
STOP FEEDING THESE PEOPLE FREE PRESS!
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by hedwards · 2013-09-09 09:49 · Score: 1

Do you have evidence to back that up? I think it's more likely that they're going to fail because of technological reasons than not trying. Plus, the reality here is that if this is a scam, that they'll be found out when they don't actually build anything. A project with that much attention is just not a viable method of scamming people.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:16 · Score: 0

Well, if we go to the Mars One website, "No new technology developments are required to establish a human settlement on Mars."
But in fact nobody knows how to land on Mars. For example, http://phys.org/news/2013-05-key-puzzle-mars.html... the Mars One people basically claim that because they don't plan on leaving, it's no big deal, but the LM for the Apollo missions was 15 tons... you're really telling me that you want to go to Mars and land in something significantly smaller than that, even if you don't plan on taking off again?

A project with that much attention is just not a viable method of scamming people.
Sure, keep telling yourself that.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:43 · Score: 0

Music festivals around here do the same, charge artists a fee to apply (of course already-famous artists excepted, they'd want a balance of new and established acts). It's to make them stop and think "do I really want to do this?" If it was free everybody and their dog would apply, plus their 2 cats would send in 4 joke applications.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by mattack2 · 2013-09-09 12:36 · Score: 2

Yeah.. and nobody can build a new successful electric car company... and nobody can build commercial space vehicles that are successful.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 12:41 · Score: 0

They're more likely to fail for financial reasons than technological reasons. I think the willingness to invest in a venture like this just isn't there in this economy.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 14:40 · Score: 0

A project with that much attention is just not a viable method of scamming people.
It sure is.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 15:36 · Score: 0

People are too gullible especially the ones that are so tunnel-visioned onto space and wanting to get out there before they expire that they can't see reason. I like to call this the Scientology effect. You're better off spending your thousands on a boat load of shrooms at least you can imagine you're on Mars... plowing some hot Martian babes *wink wink*
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by geekpowa · 2013-09-09 17:45 · Score: 3, Informative

Nice strawman.
Successful commercial launch systems already exist. And soon, in a few years probably, commercial man rated launch systems will exist too. No one here is refuting this.
Mars One is an out and out scam. That is the claim. Anyone who thinks Mars One is legit needs to familiarise themselves with what a real manned space mission looks like and what is really involved, the time, cost, and expertise, of a manned space mission. I suggest start here. And save yourself the bother of arguing that Apollo was 40 years old and with todays methods make it easier. Here are some mind boggling facts to get your head around and hopefully instil some badly needed incredulity:
1. We have not returned to the moon or even left orbit of the planet since 1972
2. Apollo cost $170b in todays rough figures. 30 times more expensive than Mars One
3. Apollo at its peak employed over 400 thousand people. Mars One - today is a dozen or so and most of them are Marketing/PR types who know fuck all about problem domain they are working in
4. Apollo mission profile is significantly simpler than Mars One. Although the return journey complicated the mission profile,the mission profile of Mars One incurs its own complications : extended stay in deep space and the necessity to provide life support and supplies for extended period of time
5. Apollo delivered in about 8 years along the way they had real and incremental work outputs to show for it. Mars one have been going from about 2011 and they have no tangible outputs to show for it other than martketing/PR spin
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 21:49 · Score: 0

1. We have not returned to the moon or even left orbit of the planet since 1972
I agree with your points, but the moon orbits the planet... so leaving the orbit is going beyond the moon.
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by MysteriousPreacher · 2013-09-09 23:37 · Score: 1

A microscope is a science tool. Can that count as evidence?

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by MysteriousPreacher · 2013-09-10 00:09 · Score: 1

They have about 100 grand or so (according to Wikipedia), which is nowhere near what they need. Even if they raised 100 times this amount, each year, for the next 10 years (based on a launch in around 2023) they'll still have less than 5% of the 6 billion dollars they're supposed to need for this. Even then, 6 billion seems pretty optimistic.
The advisory board has some interesting names attached to it. Even so, this smells like a boondoggle. I just don't see how they can meet their funding targets and somehow overcome the many technical issues that stand in their way. The latter is certainly problematic if they're a little short on engineers.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Gavagai80 · 2013-09-10 01:39 · Score: 1

You can land people on Mars without new technology -- you'll just need an insanely expensive amount of fuel for a powered landing.

--
This space intentionally left blank
Re:Of course the application wasn't free by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-10 08:41 · Score: 0

NOTE: When I give "weight" below, I'm actually talking about mass. When I say 1 ton, I mean 1000 kilograms. This isn't strictly accurate, but it's the convention we're using. We're comparing Mars and Moon landings here anyway, so not only are the actual weights different in both of those environments versus Earth, but one is a vacuum while the other has a thin atmosphere allowing aerobraking.

But in fact nobody knows how to land on Mars. For example, http://phys.org/news/2013-05-key-puzzle-mars.html [phys.org]... the Mars One people basically claim that because they don't plan on leaving, it's no big deal, but the LM for the Apollo missions was 15 tons... you're really telling me that you want to go to Mars and land in something significantly smaller than that, even if you don't plan on taking off again?
Let's be honest about the numbers. The descent stage of the Apollo lander was 10 tons and the ascent stage was 5 tons. The 5 tons of the ascent stage was over 56% fuel and then some additional percentage was the engines itself. I can't find exact numbers, but another 20% is probably an underestimate. All but 25%, or 1 and 1/4 tons, of the 5 ton ascent stage is equipment/material for getting back to lunar orbit. The descent stage did also carry some cargo, but we're still talking about 1 1/2, 2 tons tops out of that 15 tons that was actually cargo/crew/habitat.
Now, the Curiosity rover weighs in at about 1 ton and was successfully landed on Mars using a neat rocket crane after aerobraking. We've also successfully landed smaller rovers and probes with other techniques such as airbags. So, even without a large, aerobraked, then vertical rocket descended lander (which is perfectly viable), we've proven that we can land a small, self contained, 1 ton crew compartment the same way we landed Curiosity. Additional supplies and equipment could be landed with airbags or other methods. Some of those supplies could include inflatable habitats or other sorts of prefab building that the settlers could assemble (and probably bury).
So, when people say that no new technology developments are required to establish a human settlement on Mars, they are absolutely correct. There's plenty of mission planning to be done to decide the best way to use existing technology to do it, but all the required technology exists. That doesn't make it easy, of course. Frankly, that article you linked to doesn't seem to say very much other than that it won't be easy.

202586 by plopez · 2013-09-09 07:07 · Score: 5, Insightful

Lemmings.

--
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+

Re:202586 by Monty845 · 2013-09-09 07:21 · Score: 1

Summed it up in one word. Someone offered me the chance to go to mars, hell yeah I'd go, but I'd want to know a lot more about the details of the plan then those guys are providing. There are tons of big hurdles, they can be overcome, but its not gonna be simple, or cheap. I don't think a reasonable person would put faith in the group running this to be able to overcome those hurdles. Now if SpaceX was recruiting for a mars mission, sign me up.
Re:202586 by Calydor · 2013-09-09 07:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

I'm pretty sure that being picked as one of the lucky few does not suddenly rob you of the right to say you've changed your mind when you see the rocket put together by the cheap brand of duct tape. On the other hand, this publicity stunt might actually make people in power realize that there are people out there who will volunteer despite the risk, and that maybe it's worth a try after all.

--
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Re:202586 by ron_ivi · 2013-09-09 07:34 · Score: 2

So you're suggesting they're being pushed by Disney?
Re:202586 by kannibal_klown · 2013-09-09 08:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

True, but it's a decision you'd want to make earlier-than-later.
Deciding to at least start the program is a life-changing thing. For example, I doubt you'd be able to keep your job so that means losing your job AND your home since you couldn't afford payments past X months.
So let's say they talk a great game and it looks like they have their "act" together. They have scientists, their mockups look sound, etc.
A hypothetical 2 years period goes by while you're training and what-not... and you realize WOW these people do NOT know what they're doing. Their ships aren't going to be able to get 10ft off the ground let alone make it to Mars. These conditions are not going to last more than X months let alone the planned Y decades. These people have no idea what they're doing.
So you quit... and now what. You're unemployed and homeless... and when asked about the 2 year gap on your resume you labeled a psycho for thinking that Mars One (now known as a cluster-f#@k) was actually going to happen.
Re:202586 by SecurityTheatre · 2013-09-09 09:42 · Score: 1

So you quit... and now what. You're unemployed and homeless... and when asked about the 2 year gap on your resume you labeled a psycho for thinking that Mars One (now known as a cluster-f#@k) was actually going to happen.
I assume you're just being polemic here- this sort of initiative (and the prestige of beating out over 200,000 others) is a positive, not a negative.
Trust me.
Re:202586 by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 20:12 · Score: 0

Lemmings?
People who do the same thing over and over each day until they die ('just living out their lives), those are the lemmings.
I'm really surprised at all the cynicism of the Slashdot community. We're supposed to be the people wanting to go to space, convincing The Others it's a good idea.
I don't think any of these people will go to space either, but let's applaud them for wanting to, let's be happy there's momentum for this and let's push together for a way to do it properly.
On a positive note, looks like Zubrin was right:
"If you put out a call for volunteers for the first crew to Mars, they'd be lined up coast to coast"
To stand comfortably (33 cm per person), we'd actually need to make 20 lines!*
*Length from San Diego to Jacksonville is 3,347 km, with 202586 people, that's 2 cm. per person
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_distance_in_miles_from_the_East_Coast_of_the_US_to_the_West_Coast
Re:202586 by fritsd · 2013-09-10 00:10 · Score: 1

Exactly the same issues came up in the BBC documentary series "Castaway 2000" on Taransay. And that was only for 1 year. It was truly fascinating television to watch.

Granted, on Mars they'd need something more advanced than a polytunnel for their veggies...

--
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
Re:202586 by kannibal_klown · 2013-09-10 02:03 · Score: 1
Don't get me wrong... I think the venture is a big positive for humanity.
- I'm just saying... the (great?) grandparent post said there are too many unknowns to see if they really have their act together: ship quality, planning, etc.
- The grandparent post said "Well, so what. If you find out they don't have their act together then quit or leave... it's not like they won't let you"
- My response to THAT was... yeh great. If you do quit or leave then you're kind of screwed because you would have given up your job and stuff for this.
And if it's eventually / later revealed that for all of their good intentions that it was a FAIL in terms of piss-poor planning and no real tech, then society may laugh at the people that "fell for it" and gave up their jobs. Not that it's the right reaction: but it's a probable reaction for society at large. The same way society laughs at non-extreme doomsday / emergency preppers as being paranoid... until there actually is an earthquake / tsunami / etc.

Modern era Mayflower by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:08 · Score: 5, Insightful

Here's why people apply and who applies: Some do it for the 15 minutes of fame, surely, but many others are serious about it. They know the risk, they know it's a one-way ticket, but their lives are going nowhere on this planet, they've got nothing to lose and this may be just the ticket for them to do something useful for humanity.

Others may have a successful life already but they don't think in terms of "me" and "my" but in terms of humanity and its long-term goals over several generations.

And even if the mission fails, one learns from mistakes and at least they've done something to improve the next mission's chances. Both categories of applicants are real heroes. Live or die.

Re:Modern era Mayflower by rodrigoandrade · 2013-09-09 07:42 · Score: 1

Please mod up!! The title alone is worth a +5. Agree 100%. I can't think of the pilgrims wanting to come back to Europe.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by spyfrog · 2013-09-09 07:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

The difference being of course that the Mayflower settlers had a good chance of being self sustained. They didn't change planet to one totally inhospitable towards humans. They believed that they would be able to survive by simple using the same techniques as in England. This turned out to be wrong but it was more a lack off knowledge than anything else that killed them off - the place apparently supports life since people live there to this day.
Going to Mars is a totally different ballgame. You can't support yourself on Mars, at least not from the beginning. You have to trust that provisions come from Earth. If your supplies doesn't come, you starve or die from suffixation.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by jklovanc · 2013-09-09 08:10 · Score: 1

And even if the mission fails, one learns from unforeseenmistakes

Knowing that something will fail and doing it anyway is just stupid.
By the way they are not the Modern Mayflower. Many of the Mayflower passengers were fleeing religious persecution due to their Puritanism. The trip to Mars, which will not happen any time soon, has nothing to do with that.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by cjjjer · 2013-09-09 08:12 · Score: 1

Maybe. Maybe not.

What if there is indigenous people on Mars (live below the surface) and welcome these travelers with open arms and help them settle under the planet's surface in exchange for interesting technology, different food and clothing material. Then the new settlers start arriving in the thousands bringing diseases and claiming Mars land as their own.

What? it could happen...
Re:Modern era Mayflower by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:44 · Score: 2, Informative

The Puritans were not 'fleeing' religious persecution. Being 'Puritans', they strongly disapproved of the increasing liberalism in Europe. They traveled to the new world so that they could enforce their views in the new colonies.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:26 · Score: 0

Suffocation you mean
Re:Modern era Mayflower by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 10:34 · Score: 0

Die of Suffixation you mean.
There, fixedelationingerated that for you.
See you on mars! Whoooeee!!!
Re:Modern era Mayflower by DerekLyons · 2013-09-09 12:21 · Score: 1

Here's why people apply and who applies: Some do it for the 15 minutes of fame, surely, but many others are serious about it. They know the risk, they know it's a one-way ticket, but their lives are going nowhere on this planet, they've got nothing to lose and this may be just the ticket for them to do something useful for humanity.
That has to be the funniest thing I've read all day.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by jklovanc · 2013-09-09 12:28 · Score: 1

According to this they did flee persecution;

In 1620, a group of English separatists, who became known as the Pilgrims, set sail for America to escape religious persecution amid the volatile religious and political climate. under James I.
Under the 1559 Act of Uniformity, their rejection of the Church of England was declared unlawful leading many members of their East Midlands congregation to flee to Holland.
However, concerned with losing their cultural identity, the group set out to create a new colony in North America and chartered the Mayflower, a cargo ship, for the purpose. They departed from a site near Mayflower Steps in Plymouth, Devon in September 1620.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 18:15 · Score: 0

58% of the men and 72% of the women didn't even survive the trip. Mars One can crash half of their ships and still have a better track record than that.
Of those who survived the trip the average lifespan was less than 70 years, plan for enough resources and the Mars One crew will have a lot better outlook on life than the pilgrims.
Re:Modern era Mayflower by dave420 · 2013-09-09 21:25 · Score: 1

They were escaping the burgeoning liberal climate, not some fascist hell-hole. Just because the Telegraph parrots the clichéd line doesn't make it so :)
Re:Modern era Mayflower by crunchygranola · 2013-09-10 10:53 · Score: 1

But you realize that the Mars One scheme is not planning for "enough resources", right? Even if their incredible low ball budget were to get a crew to Mars, their plan provides absolutely no way to sustain them. That is being left as a problem to others, and is not even discussed in Mars One "plans".
When the various ships of settlement landed in the New World there was already air, raw materials easily fashioned into shelter and clothing, plenty of food, and people whose methods you could copy to live a comfortable healthy life, if you were clever enough to do so. And yet the English still died in droves (90% mortality in the first year was common). A Mars "colonist" will have nothing there to sustain them.

--
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age

That's a lot! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:10 · Score: -1

202,586 people from around the world? How many of them are woman/man?? Taxi Porto Seguro

So you won't die alone? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:12 · Score: 0

if NASA still favors the "one way mission". How many applicants are women?

Obligatory! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:12 · Score: 2, Interesting

I have a hard enough time on this planet, much less going it on the next farthest rock out!

On a serious note... as long as I had tasks and hobbies to entertain myself on the trip to Mars, I think I'd be fine. Getting along with people is the least of my problems. To me repititious boredom would appear to be the real killer. There is also that little psyche bit of knowing that you're on a one way ticket to an uninhabittable barren wasteland.

Of course, having a sense of adventure would probably help that!

Re:Obligatory! by phobos512 · 2013-09-09 07:32 · Score: 2

Hey, man, we're all on a one-way trip to somewhere, man. /said the hippie to no one in particular...
Re:Obligatory! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:37 · Score: 0

barren? Tell that to the martians!
Re:Obligatory! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:07 · Score: 0

To me repititious boredom would appear to be the real killer.
The real killer would be starvation. What, you think food grows there? Who's going to send the supply ships when the company goes bankrupt?

Great, now examine them... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:12 · Score: 1

Great, now examine them for mental and physical problems that will prevent them from making the trip. How many will you eliminate? I doubt the first person to go there will be drawn from this pool. NASA got this one right. You need military people. They have the best chance of handling the shit that will certainly happen without coming unglued.

Re:Great, now examine them... by spleendamage · 2013-09-09 07:36 · Score: 5, Funny

Just find someone who is addicted to single-player turn-based strategy computer games. They'd complain about the trip being too short.
Like ... my friend, not me.
Re:Great, now examine them... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:05 · Score: 5, Funny

Six dollars of game, $400 of laptop, and a couple spare solar fins on the ship to keep the battery charged.
Day 422: I seem to be the only Mars One colonist to notice that we have actually landed on Mars. I found one of the old Mars Rovers and have taken to behaving as if it was a stubborn pet dog to stay sane. While my garden is growing almost as well as the test garden did on earth, I have no idea where the other colonists manage to keep finding the Mountain Dew and beef jerky that provides their sustenance.
Re:Great, now examine them... by fritsd · 2013-09-10 00:43 · Score: 1

I don't know.. wouldn't military people feel an urge to "win", to "excel", to "do something (exciting)" wouldn't you rather have people that have an urge to "gently extract the soy bean sprouts from the red sand/astronaut-turd mixture and sprinkle them with water, for the rest of my life-- whether my death from starvation comes in 2 years or in 6 years".

--
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?

Its the Titanic all over again by ClassicASP · 2013-09-09 07:13 · Score: 1

Relatively few have enough sense to know when to abandon ship!

Re:Its the Titanic all over again by bkmoore · 2013-09-09 07:17 · Score: 1

The Titanic, but without the luxurious accommodations and there won't be any break-dancing peasants in steerage either.
Re:Its the Titanic all over again by gl4ss · 2013-09-09 08:13 · Score: 1

on the titanic you at least got on the ship..
this is more like a guy in liverpool selling tickets to the titanic III.
they have no plan to actually do the trip and if they had that part squashed out they wouldn't need measly 7 million from applicants and could find suitable persons quite easily..

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Futile by HyperQuantum · 2013-09-09 07:24 · Score: 2, Funny

So... they think they can escape the divine judgment by running away to Mars...

Really pointless, as they will find out.

--
I am not really here right now.

Re:Futile by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:39 · Score: 0

Whatever you say, General Merritt.
You should have stayed on the Wheel.

That's all? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 07:26 · Score: -1

Seems low, because I'm pretty sure there are way more than 200,000 idiots out there. Maybe most of them got lost on the way to the post office.

Hardly enough enough bodies . . . by StefanJ · 2013-09-09 07:32 · Score: 4, Funny

. . . to fertilize King Barsoom II's lawn and flower gardens! MARS NEEDS MULCH!

But seriously: Initial training for the would-be colonists will consist of living for five years in trailer homes buried beneath the soil of Antarctica's "dry deserts." People who can't cope with the psychological pressure, or who are judged insufficiently entertaining by the casting group of the MARS LIVE! production company and its advertisers and charter sponsors, will be summarily kicked off of the program. (They will receive copies of the home game, which consists of a refrigerator box equipped with fake controls and a framed color print of a Mars probe landing site.)

Re:Hardly enough enough bodies . . . by qu33ksilver · 2013-09-09 07:57 · Score: 1

Was that an Artemis Fowl reference by any chance ?
Re:Hardly enough enough bodies . . . by StefanJ · 2013-09-09 15:39 · Score: 1

I only read the first Artemis Fowl book, and it didn't make much of an impression.
Was a later one set on Mars?

Celebs by eyenot · 2013-09-09 07:36 · Score: 1

I only heard about this because Pee-Wee Herman shared the news of it, and of his application, some time ago. I'd like to say I hope he makes it, but then we'd be without Pee-Wee Herman here on Earth.

I forwarded the news to Jane Wiedlin (Guitarist for The Go-Gos) who said she'd be interested in going, but I never saw anything on her FB that said she had filed the paperwork.

I tried to get a couple of other celebs interested but so far all I know is Pee-Wee Herman put in his application. Wouldn't it be interesting if he wins the contest?

--
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee

Futurama should be a sponsor by ArcadeMan · 2013-09-09 07:36 · Score: 2

I don't want to live on this planet anymore. - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth

--
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins

Hope they bring there towel by PyrousLavawalker · 2013-09-09 07:50 · Score: 2

Oh! Thought they would be all lawyers and hairstylists.

Re:Hope they bring there towel by wonkey_monkey · 2013-09-09 09:07 · Score: 2

You forgot about the telephone sanitizers. Everyone always forgets about the telephone sanitizers.

--
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.

If you can't be with the one you love, by Overzeetop · 2013-09-09 07:51 · Score: 1

Love the one you're with.

--
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?

$35 and a mouse click are meaningless by GodfatherofSoul · 2013-09-09 08:06 · Score: 2

Build the rocket and ask who wants to actually take the trip. Lots of people are willing to indulge in a hypothetical sacrifice. BTW, I'm planning to stop eating red meat any day now.

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!

I would have signed up but by Provocateur · 2013-09-09 08:12 · Score: 1

I heard you still have to take off your shoes during pre-boarding.

--
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.

Re:I would have signed up but by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2013-09-09 11:53 · Score: 1

I heard you still have to take off your shoes during pre-boarding.
Who are you - Frank Costanza?

--
#DeleteChrome

Step 2: by superdave80 · 2013-09-09 08:12 · Score: 3, Interesting

Convince each of these 220k people to each donate $1mil to get a spaceship built...

Who is that? by gr8_phk · 2013-09-09 08:16 · Score: 2

Others may have a successful life already but they don't think in terms of "me" and "my" but in terms of humanity and its long-term goals over several generations.

While I agree with some of your statements, this one seems false. If someone was truly concerned about the long-term prospects of humanity I doubt they would conclude the best thing for them to do is die in one of the first colonies on mars. Realizing their rarity, I should thing they'd wait until a functional colony is established and only THEN try to have some kind of influence on its development.

Re:Who is that? by dgatwood · 2013-09-09 09:18 · Score: 3, Insightful

More to the point, they would try to influence the preparation to ensure that by the time they get there, the colony would be almost self-sustaining already. There's no reason it can't be done. Drop a bunch of large modules with breathable air and CO2 scrubbers, and verify remotely that they are all functioning before you send people. Then drop enough spare parts to scrub the air for at least a few decades, along with enough non-perishable food to last a similar period of time. Then drop enough building materials to build a huge, sealed, glass habitat to serve as a greenhouse for plants. Then drop equipment needed to build it (think "electric crane"). Then drop bags and bags of dirt. Then drop crates of seeds. Then drop enough solar panels to cover the state of Rhode Island and enough wire to hook it all up. Then remotely control all the equipment to make sure everything is working correctly. Then send the people to put it together. By that time, you've launched a dozen or more unmanned missions over the course of a decade, so you're sure of the launch vehicle and the landing craft. You've provided enough materials to create a sustainable living space, and you've provided enough materials to survive until they finish creating that space.

--
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Re:Who is that? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 18:25 · Score: 0

Glass habitats seems impractical. How about a series of pressurized tents? Also, not placing everything under a single dome will make it easier to repair and maintain since you can evacuate and depressurize before repairing.
Re:Who is that? by dgatwood · 2013-09-09 18:52 · Score: 2

I'm not talking about the living areas. That's what the prefabricated pods are for. I'm talking about a partially pressurized dome as a place to grow food. Tents don't conduct light, ergo, plants don't grow. With tents, your power requirements go through the roof, because you have to both artificially light and heat your greenhouse. With glass (or plexiglass), you can get away with heat, and maybe not even all that much of that. Solar panels produce less and less power over time; a greenhouse will continue to provide the same amount of light and heat essentially forever, assuming nothing damages it.
Oh, yeah. I forgot the most important part. You need the world's largest air pump. (To be more precise, you need several of them so that you'll have spares.) You're going to need to bring the pressure of that dome up to at least a tenth of an atmosphere using only the available air—about a 20:1 increase in pressure—or else the plants will wither and die.

--
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Re:Who is that? by fritsd · 2013-09-10 00:37 · Score: 1

Talk to this guy about building a prototype Mars base in Poland, maybe.

Plants don't need the full spectrum, so maybe it is possible to use solar panels that are space-rated to produce electricity, put the gardens underground protected from solar flares, and use LED lamps that don't have green to grow the plants. I've seen a picture somewhere. Aren't the Russians (IMBP) doing exactly the same thing (what did they eat on the Mars 500 experiment? IIRC it was a little bit of fresh vegetables as well as the contents of 1 large food storage module. Who knows, maybe the Chinese have got good results with hydroponic paksoi by now. There is an extremely steep "learning curve" but for all of humanity there should be a tremendous pay-off in learning "this is how complicated it is to create an artificial biosphere. So don't fuck up the one fully functional biosphere we have."

There are probably extremely important scientific results that are needed for this but are not accessible enough (e.g. just imagine that some Tchadian agricultural institute studied "how to grow salad and earth worms in sharp sand", I'm just making this example up).

--
To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?

And now it's time for a name change by Minwee · 2013-09-09 08:20 · Score: 1

They might get more attention, and make it easier to understand their goals, if they called it Duna One.

If I were 20 I would have signed up by Nimey · 2013-09-09 08:26 · Score: 1

If I was 20 and single again, I'd do it. But I'm 34 and have family responsibilities, so that's impossible.

--
Hail Eris, full of mischief...

E pluribus sanguinem

Re:If I were 20 I would have signed up by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 17:48 · Score: 0

I didn't sign up because I'm asthmatic and knew I wouldn't have a chance of being chosen. But I told my wife I'd go in a second if given the chance. She clearly doesn't understand the benefits of space exploration or the amount of sacrifice the explorers are willing to make. Her response was "you'd leave me to go to mars?" -- followed by a bunch of curse words. I think I'll be sleeping on the couch tonight.

One way trip by Carnivore24 · 2013-09-09 08:31 · Score: 2

Alone all I need is Candy Crush and a good battery, shouldn't be a problem.

Just think by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 08:38 · Score: 1

It would be so exciting to be the first corpse on Mars!

Everyone should go ! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:06 · Score: 0

`

Just like in the short story "The Marching Morons".

`

Money to be made by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 09:14 · Score: 0

If you could get the cost of a trip to Mars down to something like USD $500,000. about the cost of a mortage on a really nice house. And there are about 200,000 people who want to go to Mars, that's about a $100 billion. If only someone could capitalize on that...

Of course the current cost of getting an indvidual to mars is something ridiculous like tens of millions, or even 100s of millions.

Don't Call Us by Princeofcups · 2013-09-09 10:04 · Score: 3, Insightful

This is purely publicity and funding for the "Program." Let's be serious. Donating their $35 does not in any way make them eligible for anything. Everyone knows that, or they are delusional. If anyone is going to Mars, they will be chosen based a long sequence of qualifications and skills, and sending in $35 is not one of those.

--
The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.

This sounds familiar by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:30 · Score: 0

How's that Pan Am waiting list to go to the moon working out?

http://backstoryradio.org/2013/08/19/pan-am-and-the-waiting-list-for-the-moon/

Mars is romance, moon is utility by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 11:47 · Score: 1

Dennis Wingo has written, "Mars is a destination of romance, the moon of utility." And all discussion about going to Mars reminded me of this from Rocketpunk and MacGuffinite,
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/macguffinite.php

"The Gobi Desert is about a thousand times as hospitable as Mars and five hundred times cheaper and easier to reach. Nobody ever writes "Gobi Desert Opera" because, well, it's just kind of plonkingly obvious that there's no good reason to go there and live. It's ugly, it's inhospitable and there's no way to make it pay. Mars is just the same, really. We just romanticize it because it's so hard to reach."

[some people debate this as there are few settlers in Gobi desert, but you get the idea]

I'm trying to log in so I don't have to post AC, I log in but when ever I go to an article, it puts me back at AC. Any advice?

Time for step one! by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2013-09-09 11:52 · Score: 1

We need to start building a REALLY BIG trebuchet...

--
#DeleteChrome

Reminds me of zambia space program by kakaburra · 2013-09-09 19:15 · Score: 1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Makuka_Nkoloso

Getting budget is the hardest part of space flight by captainpanic · 2013-09-09 19:16 · Score: 1

The main speciality of the Mars One project is fundraising and public relations, not space travel.

Isn't that exactly what the nerds of NASA suck at: getting enough funding? NASA only get 17 billion per year (approx.). The global media advertising business is approx. worth 500 billion $ per year (source: http://www.plunkettresearch.com/entertainment-media-publishing-market-research/industry-and-business-data).

Do you have any idea of the value of such a Mars mission in terms of advertising? It would be insane. I do not think it is unrealistic to assume you can get 10% of that global advertising money (50 billion per year) if you do a reality show of such a mission. That would mean you have triple the budget of NASA.

I'd say this may actually work. As long as the guys at Mars One admit that they need a little help in building and designing their rocket and space station.

Supporting suicide is murder. by Sqreater · 2013-09-09 22:29 · Score: 1

'nuff said.

--
E Proelio Veritas.

Re:Supporting suicide is murder. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-10 00:53 · Score: 0

So.. you're saying the Koch brothers should go to jail, for their crime of fomenting global warming denialism in the population? Or is it in your opinion not suicide to deny that we need to reduce our CO2 production?

My Predictation by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-09 23:00 · Score: 0

2023 will rock up and this will be their news release...

It's 2023 and we were hoping to inform you all that we are ready to go to Mars, unfortunately, we weren't able to raise the funds. No refunds will be made available, however, we are pushing for a new date of 2043... just one last push guys!

2043 rocks up and another news release...

Well it's 2043 we are soooo close but we need another push guys so we'll have to push that date to 2063. Sorry! But keep sending in cash!

20 years later...

Well guys it's been one heck of a ride, unfortunately we have some bad news... we are just not there yet our 'engineers' tell us they'll definitely have something together by 2083 for sure this time!

2103 comes a knockin'

Mars and stuff... Send money!

... oh god you get the picture right?!?!?

Where Is Their Engineering Document? by crunchygranola · 2013-09-10 11:19 · Score: 1

When Elon Musk publicized his Hyperloop scheme he provided a fairly detailed technical presentation of how it was all going to work to justify its feasibility, and his claimed price tag of $7 billion.

Musk's document provided a pretty good prima facie validation of the concept, although at the time a large number of /.ers piled on with criticisms without even bothering to look at the report. But by putting a specific proposal out there Musk had the guts to give serious critics the material they needed to critique the plan.

Mars One is claiming:

"No new major developments or inventions are needed to make the mission plan a reality. Each stage of Mars One mission plan employs existing, validated and available technology.
Components that make the mission plan will be made exclusively by existing suppliers. Mars One has received confirmation of this from all major suppliers through letters of interest. While most of the components required are not immediately available with the exact specifications, at this time, there is no need for radical modifications to the current component designs. All suppliers have confirmed their ability to build what is required-- and they can do so now."

Pretty bold claims these. What proof is there that they are true? Surely they can publish these current component designs and describe, for example, exactly how they are proposing to make the Mars landing.

So where is the plan - at least at the level of detail and length that Musk put together - to prove this isn't just PR-flack talk?

--
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age

Mars trip by Dabido · 2013-09-11 00:13 · Score: 1

Hope they give preferences to politicians ... in fact, can we convince the Mars program to send them all?

--
Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)

Slashdot Mirror

Final Mars One Numbers Are In, Over 200,000 People Applied

176 comments