Tourism will inevitably fund more exploration. Maybe it's an inversion from what's been historically so, but we're not just going to hang around in LEO as a species. Simply not going to happen.
Might take 100 years (which I think would be criminally negligent), but we ARE going to colonize this solar system.
This is a great read. I honestly don't know how much credence to give the "weird aircraft" phenomenon, but I tend to think there's something there. Too many historical dead-ends.
The book above is by Nick Cook, a pretty hard-bitten aerospace journalist. He didn't CONVINCE me, but he sure made me look at the available evidence again.
If NASA was spending its budget on spaceflight research, I would be its A-1 fan. But it's operating Shuttle and ISS, which are both a tremendous waste of resources.
Congress agrees that NASA shouldn't do anything that doesn't put absurd amounts of money into their particular districts. Their opinion is, to me, irrelevant.
NASA is supposed to be doing basic research and development, and acting as a technology incubator. They should most emphatically NOT be doing is writing ill-founded white papers on how private industry people's ideas just won't work, watching those companies go bankrupt, and buying up their technology for pennies on the dollar.
Arrival times are not relevant to the current discussion. Sure NASA did amazing work...thirty years ago. They have totally failed to do anything useful since. Now that private companies are stepping up to the plate (over NASA's objections), we're gointg to see some rapid progress.
Maybe not as much as the ten year golden age between '60 and '70, but much faster than the utter failures of the intervening 30 years.
Yes, I'm talking about Shuttle and ISS. Both are bad designs, and way too expensive.
Huh? If you're not in orbit, you're not rendezvous-ing with anything that is in orbit. Well, you might rendezvous with it, but you'd basically be a kinetic kill vehicle, and then everybody's sad.
Ask Prince. And James Brown. And any number of other artists who had to fight tooth and nail against their record labels for permission to perform works that they composed and performed.
The RIAA being about the 1st Amendment is like the Czech secret police being about Miranda rights.
Slashdot Mirror
2CV? Modern?
That one is just too easy, friend. I'm going to leave it right where I found it.
Citroen had this when? '70's? Or was it earlier?
Tucker had it in the late 40's. Still a bad idea. Well, poorly implemented, anyhow...
Really? Which cars? I'm curious.
Better gas mileage than WHAT? A dump truck?
Jeebus.
And here I was worried about them being all biased and stuff. Good to know I was overreacting.
What, you mean like Audis with unintended acceleration?
You know that was a fraud, right?
Cool...I'll check it out.
Tourism will inevitably fund more exploration. Maybe it's an inversion from what's been historically so, but we're not just going to hang around in LEO as a species. Simply not going to happen.
Might take 100 years (which I think would be criminally negligent), but we ARE going to colonize this solar system.
This is a great read. I honestly don't know how much credence to give the "weird aircraft" phenomenon, but I tend to think there's something there. Too many historical dead-ends.
The book above is by Nick Cook, a pretty hard-bitten aerospace journalist. He didn't CONVINCE me, but he sure made me look at the available evidence again.
I give a shit.
Define "exploitation" and tell me why it's bad. Be sure to specify how it's different from mining.
If NASA was spending its budget on spaceflight research, I would be its A-1 fan. But it's operating Shuttle and ISS, which are both a tremendous waste of resources.
I'm not apathetic. I'm powerless.
Actually, you'd slightly decrease the need for boost burns to keep the ISS up in the sky. The mass fraction of trash is pretty small...
OK, did you read what they were talking about?
Their plan (send stuff back on Shuttle) is now non-viable because there are no Shuttle missions.
Now, ISS and Shuttle are both stupid boondoggles, but this particular facet of the system is not as stupid as you make out.
Congress agrees that NASA shouldn't do anything that doesn't put absurd amounts of money into their particular districts. Their opinion is, to me, irrelevant.
NASA is supposed to be doing basic research and development, and acting as a technology incubator. They should most emphatically NOT be doing is writing ill-founded white papers on how private industry people's ideas just won't work, watching those companies go bankrupt, and buying up their technology for pennies on the dollar.
Had anybody else even built flight hardware? I think one of the Canadian teams did...but no, I don't think there was any real competition.
OK, am I missing something? It's a...board game?
Wow. My rational faculties are so not engaged by that.
Arrival times are not relevant to the current discussion. Sure NASA did amazing work...thirty years ago. They have totally failed to do anything useful since. Now that private companies are stepping up to the plate (over NASA's objections), we're gointg to see some rapid progress.
Maybe not as much as the ten year golden age between '60 and '70, but much faster than the utter failures of the intervening 30 years.
Yes, I'm talking about Shuttle and ISS. Both are bad designs, and way too expensive.
Right, which is why "[he has] no doubt that private attempts will continue to undercut NASA costs by insane amounts."
You are making the argument that you're arguing against.
Huh? If you're not in orbit, you're not rendezvous-ing with anything that is in orbit. Well, you might rendezvous with it, but you'd basically be a kinetic kill vehicle, and then everybody's sad.
You mean the prize purse that was (initially) put up by the City of St. Louis, Missouri, USA?
Sometimes I think America's achievements are in the same category as the old saw about marriage...what's yours is yours and what's ours is yours.
Whatever, man. Obviously nothing good has ever, ever come out of the US, so your bias is totally justifiable.
FWIW, I bought my Powerbook from Small Dog. I got a great deal, and it's a great computer. Zero remorse.
http://www.smalldog.com/product/12653399
Here's an iBook for $859. Not that I really think you'll buy it...
Ask Prince. And James Brown. And any number of other artists who had to fight tooth and nail against their record labels for permission to perform works that they composed and performed.
The RIAA being about the 1st Amendment is like the Czech secret police being about Miranda rights.