No no!
The average American buys it on the street, and is too ignorant of both chemistry and biology to a) be able to test whether it's the real thing and
b) have a clue what it's doing to his health
Absolutely right. Tell them NO, then do it privately. NASA programs don't seem to be about getting there any more, but about showcasing bleeding edge technology at vast expense. Use rusty edge 60s/70s technology to get there and if you must bleed, concentrate on the robotics, which will increase the ability of people to do something useful once they get there.
About three years ago I was at a mining conference at The Hole (Sudbury, Ontario - world's deepest nickel mine) - who was the keynote speaker? AI guru Marvin Minsky talking about the types of AI you would need to develop to build useful structures in space.
He was proposing simple self-replicating robots based on asymetrical tesselating shapes that link intelligently to form complex structures. Other speakers also mentioned space exploration and robotics.
So these guys are already thinking about space projects and how to go about it. INCO, De Beers, Anglo-American, etc...all present and correct.
From their point of view, they are already doing deep mining in very hot, hostile environments with increasing reliance on automatic control systems and robotics. I spoke to suits who were totally serious about this - they don't see such a great difference between some of the environments they have to operate in here on earth, and the sort of problems they will encounter in space. But they do need to get from here to there - at about $10,000 for every pound weight of stuff you lift.
Tax breaks for companies wanting to go into space would be more useful than shovelling funds at politically-correct NASA programs.
Slashdot Mirror
No no! The average American buys it on the street, and is too ignorant of both chemistry and biology to a) be able to test whether it's the real thing and b) have a clue what it's doing to his health
Absolutely right. Tell them NO, then do it privately. NASA programs don't seem to be about getting there any more, but about showcasing bleeding edge technology at vast expense. Use rusty edge 60s/70s technology to get there and if you must bleed, concentrate on the robotics, which will increase the ability of people to do something useful once they get there.
About three years ago I was at a mining conference at The Hole (Sudbury, Ontario - world's deepest nickel mine) - who was the keynote speaker? AI guru Marvin Minsky talking about the types of AI you would need to develop to build useful structures in space.
He was proposing simple self-replicating robots based on asymetrical tesselating shapes that link intelligently to form complex structures. Other speakers also mentioned space exploration and robotics.
So these guys are already thinking about space projects and how to go about it. INCO, De Beers, Anglo-American, etc...all present and correct.
From their point of view, they are already doing deep mining in very hot, hostile environments with increasing reliance on automatic control systems and robotics. I spoke to suits who were totally serious about this - they don't see such a great difference between some of the environments they have to operate in here on earth, and the sort of problems they will encounter in space. But they do need to get from here to there - at about $10,000 for every pound weight of stuff you lift.
Tax breaks for companies wanting to go into space would be more useful than shovelling funds at politically-correct NASA programs.