"Because we lack the money and the technology to do it. "
NASA could establish a permanent presence on Mars within 20 years for a fraction of their current budget. They don't, because they choose not to. They choose not to, because their job isn't to explore and exploit space, but to feed congresscritters' pork habits.
"But they aren't because it's not feasible."
That's simply not true. If you'd like to outline why you think it's not feasible, we can have a productive discussion.
"sustained the space program and kept it going for well-on 30 years"
Sustaining the space program is not an end in itself, otherwise the Shuttle and ISS would make sense to me. The space program's goal should be a) space exploration and exploitation, and b) research.
"Is it better to give up privacy rights for the sake of better communication and collaboration between law enforcement agencies?"
No. Next question?
"it would only guarantee that right to it's citizens."
Where does this idea come from? The Constitution says NOTHING about the rights of citizens (except for voting). It lists some of the inalienable rights of all persons that the US Government is explicitly forbidden from infringing.
OK, what does the 18-25 demographic have to do with the majority opinion of taxpayers? Nothing, that's what.
I'm not saying anything at all about NASA's funding strategies. I am, however, saying that conclusions based on aggregate data are based on aggregate data, and have little if any correlation to the predilections of any given individual.
Stereotypes are sloppy thinking, and statistics mean whatever you want to make them mean. Vision is an individual pursuit.
You interpret it however you wish. I meant it more in terms of "This guy is delusional, and is so attached to his own vision of the universe that there's no discussing anything with him."
Perhaps the notion that large groups of people can be labeled and pigeonholed and assumed to be homogenous is misleading and unhelpful. Perhaps one could do a little mental heavy lifting, and realize that generalizations are frequently not terribly accurate.
When was the last time that taxes solved a problem? I mean, really SOLVED it, not created a bureaucracy that depends on maintaining the existence of the problem at a sustainable level forever?
"A manned mission to Mars and settling Mars are two entirely different propositions;"
Why? Why not have the first mission designed integrally with the ideal of establishing a long-term presence? I agree with you 100%: Flags and footprints is a waste of time and money. Even if the first Mars-tronauts aren't colonists, I think they should absolutely be setting up the colonists' house.
"the project will likely get killed before it ever gets executed"
Oh, agreed. Depending on Congress for anything that requires foresight and vision and daring is a losing proposition.
In part, I agree with you. The best thing NASA might be able to do in the near term is shoot robots around. But, I don't agree that that should be the end of human space exploration: It's only the beginning.
"and get orders of magnitude more scientific data"
Yet, if we send people to Mars, we get a whole new planet to live on and explore, forever.
I'll vote for sending people to Mars, thanks. Scientific data and photographs are cool and all, but actual real meatbags on other planets is way, way, way, infinitely, indescribably, ineffably, superbly more exciting.
Why bother with exploring space if we're not going to go there?
"has the largest per-capita energy consumption of any part of the US."
Well, my wife works at a titanium foundry in Portland, and I'm pretty sure that melting titanium uses rather a lot of energy. They're located here because power is cheap. Invisible hand strikes again!
Because, of course, it's completely impossible to enjoy both reading and watching video entertainment. Just like you can't appreciate both sculpture and painting. Can't happen.
OK, so I'm a fanboy because I told you to not believe the person who's trying to sell you something? Dude, that's just common sense.
"I guess you've got to be pretty insane to paint Microsoft as the Satan of vendor lock-in, completely ignore GNU/Linux and jump to Mac which not only locks you into software but hardware too"
OK, if I had done any of those things, you might have a productive discussion with me about them. But since I didn't, I suggest you take it up with the person who did say them. I (me this carbon unit) think Microsoft is the Satan of mediocre-to-lousy quality software, with a pretty unethical business behind it. Don't much care about vendor lock in, if it's a good vendor.
Ignore GNU/Linux? Well, it's not for me. If you like it, great.
Locks you into software and hardware? As long as they do the job, vendor lock in isn't the end of the world for me. I don't get all weepy at the notion of a Mazda vehicle with a Mazda engine, either. If it works, it works.
I was surprised that Apple made the jump to Intel, but it looks like it was handled very gracefully. It could very well have gone the other way. You're arguing to a straw man.
I see. Please pardon my multicultural blindness, as here in the United States, we like our jokes to be funny. Your lack of funniness led me to believe you were trying to be, what's that thing that's the opposite of funny? Oh yeah. Not funny.
I appreciate this opportunity to broaden my cultural horizons.
Maybe physics is different in Canada, but it's an easy matter to superheat a fluid by maintaining it under pressure.
Maybe physics is different in Canada, but the references I've read say the coffee was 180-190 degrees, which is lower than the boiling point of water at STP.
It must be so comforting to just be able to write it off as stupid people doing stupid things, and not deliberate malfeasance.
Slashdot Mirror
"Because we lack the money and the technology to do it. "
NASA could establish a permanent presence on Mars within 20 years for a fraction of their current budget. They don't, because they choose not to. They choose not to, because their job isn't to explore and exploit space, but to feed congresscritters' pork habits.
"But they aren't because it's not feasible."
That's simply not true. If you'd like to outline why you think it's not feasible, we can have a productive discussion.
"sustained the space program and kept it going for well-on 30 years"
Sustaining the space program is not an end in itself, otherwise the Shuttle and ISS would make sense to me. The space program's goal should be a) space exploration and exploitation, and b) research.
Hmm. I think that the right to be left alone is a pretty fundamental notion. Justice Brandeis agrees with me, and disagrees with you.
Is that a shallow philosophy of rights? If I'm not free to go about my business without surveillance, I'm not free at all.
"Is it better to give up privacy rights for the sake of better communication and collaboration between law enforcement agencies?"
No. Next question?
"it would only guarantee that right to it's citizens."
Where does this idea come from? The Constitution says NOTHING about the rights of citizens (except for voting). It lists some of the inalienable rights of all persons that the US Government is explicitly forbidden from infringing.
Because cops have guns, and can break into your house in the middle of the night and shoot you. Banks don't do that.
Cops can, and should, be held to the highest moral, legal, and ethical standards, not the lowest ones.
OK, what does the 18-25 demographic have to do with the majority opinion of taxpayers? Nothing, that's what.
I'm not saying anything at all about NASA's funding strategies. I am, however, saying that conclusions based on aggregate data are based on aggregate data, and have little if any correlation to the predilections of any given individual.
Stereotypes are sloppy thinking, and statistics mean whatever you want to make them mean. Vision is an individual pursuit.
You interpret it however you wish. I meant it more in terms of "This guy is delusional, and is so attached to his own vision of the universe that there's no discussing anything with him."
But whatever floats your boat.
Perhaps the notion that large groups of people can be labeled and pigeonholed and assumed to be homogenous is misleading and unhelpful. Perhaps one could do a little mental heavy lifting, and realize that generalizations are frequently not terribly accurate.
Vote for whom, exactly?
Dude, I've learned my lesson. I'm not even gonna bother with you.
When was the last time that taxes solved a problem? I mean, really SOLVED it, not created a bureaucracy that depends on maintaining the existence of the problem at a sustainable level forever?
"A manned mission to Mars and settling Mars are two entirely different propositions;"
Why? Why not have the first mission designed integrally with the ideal of establishing a long-term presence? I agree with you 100%: Flags and footprints is a waste of time and money. Even if the first Mars-tronauts aren't colonists, I think they should absolutely be setting up the colonists' house.
"the project will likely get killed before it ever gets executed"
Oh, agreed. Depending on Congress for anything that requires foresight and vision and daring is a losing proposition.
In part, I agree with you. The best thing NASA might be able to do in the near term is shoot robots around. But, I don't agree that that should be the end of human space exploration: It's only the beginning.
"and get orders of magnitude more scientific data"
Yet, if we send people to Mars, we get a whole new planet to live on and explore, forever.
I'll vote for sending people to Mars, thanks. Scientific data and photographs are cool and all, but actual real meatbags on other planets is way, way, way, infinitely, indescribably, ineffably, superbly more exciting.
Why bother with exploring space if we're not going to go there?
That's just me, though.
"has the largest per-capita energy consumption of any part of the US."
Well, my wife works at a titanium foundry in Portland, and I'm pretty sure that melting titanium uses rather a lot of energy. They're located here because power is cheap. Invisible hand strikes again!
How do you fit a 29 FOOT television in an apartment? Do you live in Brobdingnag?
Because, of course, it's completely impossible to enjoy both reading and watching video entertainment. Just like you can't appreciate both sculpture and painting. Can't happen.
Sanctimonious prat.
Well, golly. Thanks for clearing that up for us.
If you're in a hurry, push the button. If you wish to obsessively fiddle with window size, do it manually.
The computer is not psychic, and there is no "do what I mean" button.
Which standards are those? Low ones?
OK, so I'm a fanboy because I told you to not believe the person who's trying to sell you something? Dude, that's just common sense.
"I guess you've got to be pretty insane to paint Microsoft as the Satan of vendor lock-in, completely ignore GNU/Linux and jump to Mac which not only locks you into software but hardware too"
OK, if I had done any of those things, you might have a productive discussion with me about them. But since I didn't, I suggest you take it up with the person who did say them. I (me this carbon unit) think Microsoft is the Satan of mediocre-to-lousy quality software, with a pretty unethical business behind it. Don't much care about vendor lock in, if it's a good vendor.
Ignore GNU/Linux? Well, it's not for me. If you like it, great.
Locks you into software and hardware? As long as they do the job, vendor lock in isn't the end of the world for me. I don't get all weepy at the notion of a Mazda vehicle with a Mazda engine, either. If it works, it works.
I was surprised that Apple made the jump to Intel, but it looks like it was handled very gracefully. It could very well have gone the other way. You're arguing to a straw man.
And you should always take every word that comes out of a salesperson's mouth as the gospel truth, and not apply common sense ever.
I see. Please pardon my multicultural blindness, as here in the United States, we like our jokes to be funny. Your lack of funniness led me to believe you were trying to be, what's that thing that's the opposite of funny? Oh yeah. Not funny.
I appreciate this opportunity to broaden my cultural horizons.
"Corporate Welfare is welfare, no matter how it's handed out."
Uh huh. I think we can find some bigger welfare recipients than NPR, who operates on the Fed's couch fishing proceeds.
Maybe physics is different in Canada, but it's an easy matter to superheat a fluid by maintaining it under pressure.
Maybe physics is different in Canada, but the references I've read say the coffee was 180-190 degrees, which is lower than the boiling point of water at STP.
It must be so comforting to just be able to write it off as stupid people doing stupid things, and not deliberate malfeasance.
So, just get rid of all product liability lawsuits? Corporations can do no wrong?
Or should we present them to Your Majesty for judgement? If so, I'm going to need your home phone number.