Alright, who's going?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/22/world/mars-one-way-ticket/
Only if I can bring a friend.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/Bowie_LifeOnMars.jpg)
Cody
Quote from: selfdestroyer on February 17, 2015, 04:45:53 PM
Only if I can bring a friend.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/Bowie_LifeOnMars.jpg)
Cody
That might be possible. By the time that takes off in 2023, he might be up for one last trip.
Quote from: pickdropper on February 17, 2015, 04:48:24 PM
Quote from: selfdestroyer on February 17, 2015, 04:45:53 PM
Only if I can bring a friend.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/Bowie_LifeOnMars.jpg)
Cody
That might be possible. By the time that takes off in 2023, he might be up for one last trip.
Haha good point.
Cody
I can come up with a list of people I'd like to send there.
A local woman has made the 100 cut that was announced the other day.
http://www.thespec.com/news-story/5341142-mission-semifinals-burlington-s-karen-cumming-thrilled-to-make-mars-100/
I've had that discussion with friends on a few occasions, but its usually of the following variety: If you were given the option to be sent into interstellar space (lets say we can go half light speed, relativistic/ time dilation issues be damned-you aren't returning) on a ship with all provisions needed to survive and be occupied (a bench and supplies plz) for the rest of your life, would you? The only caveat; you're alone, and you communication with others will be limited to the first year or two of your travels. I think i'd say yes.
I'd probably be up for that... Thought I'm not sure they'll want to send a (then) 53 year old fat geek into space...
Mars is cool, but I'd rather go to Europa. Might as well make it worth the trip!
Quote from: juansolo on February 17, 2015, 05:43:16 PM
I'd probably be up for that... Thought I'm not sure they'll want to send a (then) 53 year old fat geek into space...
I dunno, "53 Year-Old Fat Geek in Space" sounds like a pretty solid B movie.
Quote from: ggarms on February 17, 2015, 05:39:03 PM
I've had that discussion with friends on a few occasions, but its usually of the following variety: If you were given the option to be sent into interstellar space (lets say we can go half light speed, relativistic/ time dilation issues be damned-you aren't returning) on a ship with all provisions needed to survive and be occupied (a bench and supplies plz) for the rest of your life, would you? The only caveat; you're alone, and you communication with others will be limited to the first year or two of your travels. I think i'd say yes.
I'd go nuts. Probably quicker than I'd like to think.
Quote from: culturejam on February 17, 2015, 06:01:35 PM
Quote from: ggarms on February 17, 2015, 05:39:03 PM
I've had that discussion with friends on a few occasions, but its usually of the following variety: If you were given the option to be sent into interstellar space (lets say we can go half light speed, relativistic/ time dilation issues be damned-you aren't returning) on a ship with all provisions needed to survive and be occupied (a bench and supplies plz) for the rest of your life, would you? The only caveat; you're alone, and you communication with others will be limited to the first year or two of your travels. I think i'd say yes.
I'd go nuts. Probably quicker than I'd like to think.
I think most people would go nuts in isolation. Hell, even on The Red Dwarf, Lister got to talk to a hologram and a cat.
Quote from: bcalla on February 17, 2015, 05:18:55 PM
I can come up with a list of people I'd like to send there.
Thread: won.
This is existentially bothersome to me. :-[
Quote from: midwayfair on February 17, 2015, 06:31:23 PM
This is existentially bothersome to me. :-[
I feel the same way really.
What has humanity become to create a 'Big Brother' real life shows with full media coverage to send people one way to a dustbowl while the real problems like war and starvation, diseases are just another sideline show and don't get tackled.
6 billion bucks for such a mission.
$ 25 saves eyesight for cataract patients in the Pacific nations for people that otherwise go blind.
http://www.hollows.org.nz/ (http://www.hollows.org.nz/)
I know where my priorities are to spend money.
This is so sad I can't even find a joke about it.
Quote from: madbean on February 17, 2015, 05:51:21 PM
Mars is cool, but I'd rather go to Europa. Might as well make it worth the trip!
I'd suggest go to Europe rather that Europa, the food and toilets are much better there and rather than in the spacecraft you can have a shower every now and then. Return flights are possible too.
Finally found a joke I could add to this... ;)
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:49:11 PM
Quote from: madbean on February 17, 2015, 05:51:21 PM
Mars is cool, but I'd rather go to Europa. Might as well make it worth the trip!
I'd suggest go to Europe rather that Europa, the food and toilets are much better there and rather than in the spacecraft you can have a shower every now and then. Return flights are possible too.
Finally found a joke I could add to this... ;)
European food and toilets/shower facilities!? :-\ I'll take my chances with the Europans.
Quote from: Torgoslayer on February 17, 2015, 07:52:45 PM
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:49:11 PM
Quote from: madbean on February 17, 2015, 05:51:21 PM
Mars is cool, but I'd rather go to Europa. Might as well make it worth the trip!
I'd suggest go to Europe rather that Europa, the food and toilets are much better there and rather than in the spacecraft you can have a shower every now and then. Return flights are possible too.
Finally found a joke I could add to this... ;)
European food and toilets/shower facilities!? :-\ I'll take my chances with the Europans.
Well apparently there's no shower at all during the seven month space trip and you pee into your space suit for seven month straight.
Just have a think for a minute about that before you sign the application... ;)
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:29:53 PM
[...]
What has humanity become to create a 'Big Brother' real life shows with full media coverage to send people one way to a dustbowl while the real problems like war and starvation, diseases are just another sideline show and don't get tackled.
[...]
Exactly! There is no chance of this going anywhere past the simulated reality TV stage and that's the only point to the whole thing in reality. The more cynical side of me looks on the thing as just another attempt at distracting people from dealing with real issues we have here. The best place we know of to live in the universe is right here, how about we spend the effort trying to keep this place livable.
The little kid wanting to be an astronaut side of me agrees with Brian. Assuming we could get there and back alive and functional, Europa would be a totally spectacular destination. Mars pretty much just looks like where I grew up -- except totally lifeless.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Mfh1PTQkDp0/TwSk56XpcFI/AAAAAAAABlw/ltc6Ypj-bPM/s1600/IMG_4411.jpg)
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:56:44 PM
Quote from: Torgoslayer on February 17, 2015, 07:52:45 PM
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:49:11 PM
Quote from: madbean on February 17, 2015, 05:51:21 PM
Mars is cool, but I'd rather go to Europa. Might as well make it worth the trip!
I'd suggest go to Europe rather that Europa, the food and toilets are much better there and rather than in the spacecraft you can have a shower every now and then. Return flights are possible too.
Finally found a joke I could add to this... ;)
European food and toilets/shower facilities!? :-\ I'll take my chances with the Europans.
Well apparently there's no shower at all during the seven month space trip and you pee into your space suit for seven month straight.
Just have a think for a minute about that before you sign the application... ;)
Poor pispots and pannekoeken. I'll wait for the Japanese mission.
Quote from: midwayfair on February 17, 2015, 08:40:07 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Mfh1PTQkDp0/TwSk56XpcFI/AAAAAAAABlw/ltc6Ypj-bPM/s1600/IMG_4411.jpg)
Jon, that's my favorite kurt (aside from galapagos). Funny, I started reading again a few days ago!
[...]
Jon, that's my favorite kurt (aside from galapagos). Funny, I started reading again a few days ago!
[/quote]
I loved Galapagos, but Bluebeard is my favorite.
On the flipside of Jon's argument. Without science, without exploration, what are we? Just drones fulfilling the needs of the corporate machine in order to make more drones to do the same. What's the point of living without a soul?
We are becoming a parasitic lifeform hellbent on destroying our own natural environment. At some point we're going to need to leave this little blue planet and infect other worlds with our greed and wars. Obviously not in our lifetimes, but in future generations this is going to become staggeringly important if we don't do something about the way we're heading.
As a species we piss money away at an alarming rate in order to line the pockets of the increasingly wealthy elite at the expense of everyone else. 6 billion in comparison is pocket change to the amounts of money that are dealt with in banking for example/ It's been going on since the 80's. Throwing 6 billion into a space programme is feck all in the scheme of things. The whole reality angle depresses me. It should be about science. But science funded this way bothers me.
Then again, money isn't real. It's all just figures on a computer program. I like the idea of going somewhere where people actually have to have common sense and real skills. The chances of getting up there with the arseholes who actually run things down here is remote to say the least (and if one did get up there, they wouldn't last very long).
Our world is broken for all sorts of reasons. Wanting to leave it and start another one doesn't seem to be such a bad idea to me.
Quote from: cooder on February 17, 2015, 07:29:53 PM
Quote from: midwayfair on February 17, 2015, 06:31:23 PM
This is existentially bothersome to me. :-[
I feel the same way really.
What has humanity become to create a 'Big Brother' real life shows with full media coverage to send people one way to a dustbowl while the real problems like war and starvation, diseases are just another sideline show and don't get tackled.
6 billion bucks for such a mission.
$ 25 saves eyesight for cataract patients in the Pacific nations for people that otherwise go blind.
http://www.hollows.org.nz/ (http://www.hollows.org.nz/)
I know where my priorities are to spend money.
This is so sad I can't even find a joke about it.
(time to get on my high horse here)
This seems like a false dichotomy to me. I don't see it as an either or situation. We have enough resources as a civilization and on this planet to do virtually anything. It only takes the will and then a commitment to follow through. There were just as many terrible things happening to humans all over the world when the Vikings came to the Americas (or Columbus if that's your thing) and when we went to the moon. But, we did it anyway. And, I do not think anyone would argue now that those explorations were mistakes...that humanity did not benefit as a whole from a few venturing out into the unknown.
Space exploration is paramount to the success and preservation of human beings when you talk in terms of hundreds or thousands of millennia. We WILL have to mine asteroids at some point in the future. We WILL eventually have to find a new home beyond earth. These things cannot be done until we take the baby steps. And the sooner we do that the sooner we will reap the benefits as a civilization. That's why I think it is important to do these things as soon as we are capable.
juansolo, I hate to say I completely agree, but unfortunately, I do. It seems in my mind that the most pressing matter facing everyone everywhere is the alarming rate at which we are destroying the only space ship we really have. And resources continue being devoted to things which further our decline rather than elevate us to our maximum potential as a species. Case in point: less bombs, more science.
I worry that the motivations behind the most recent drive for the democratization of space travel are fundamentally centered around exploiting a new revenue source rather than pushing any sort of boundary (regardless of what the forward facing message of such ventures are). I don't mean to sound completely cynical; there are definitely things I remain hopeful about. As bean said, this is at least a small and necessary step forward. The Carl Sagan pale blue dot quote comes to mind. I just hope we don't end up at the bottom of the hole we are digging before we realize we can't get out, no matter how clever we are.
Quote from: ggarms on February 17, 2015, 09:46:10 PM
I worry that the motivations behind the most recent drive for the democratization of space travel are fundamentally centered around exploiting a new revenue source rather than pushing any sort of boundary (regardless of what the forward facing message of such ventures are).
Very interesting.. I need to ponder on this more.
Cody
Essentially everything has become about money. Everything. Which is stunting us as a species, because if it doesn't make money, it's not done.
50 years ago we landed a man on the moon. The motivations for this are well known (the other thing we like to do as a species...). BUT we decided to do it, our best and brightest were given the tools they needed and they showed us what we were capable of.
Since then we've done fuck all that's pushed any boundaries. The single most important invention since has been the internet, which should have been a way for the best and brightest to communicate more successfully. As it is corp's clamour to control and find ways to make money from it. Space travel? The first question anyone asks will be 'what's in it for us?'.
It's been happening forever. The best example being Tesla, one of humanity's most brilliant thinkers ever. He came up with a way of transmitting electricity wirelessly, but his backers found out that they couldn't tell who was using it so were unable to bill them, and pulled out. This is our nature. I dislike people because of it. You have a genuine genius there stopped dead by an arsehole in a suit who couldn't see a way of making money from it.
It's the same reason we're still relying on fossil fuels. It's massively short sighted and all about money.
I think I might be a hippy... *cries*
Money is just a trading medium.
It really comes down to where your heart is when making things happen.
Getting your investment back with some profit while pushing the boundaries of science sounds really awesome to me!
That way you have money to use on the next grand adventure! Yea sure...
I have to agree with John. Every time I drive on the freeway in Southern California and think about all the excess metal wrapped around single drivers and fossil fuel explosions excreting poisonous gasses pushing people down the road I think why are we doing this?
But since I'm broke and just a slave of the Man I will keep my head down,
tow the line, and hope for the best. boo hoo blubber... I need a beer.. at least a beer.
Give them beer and they will fall in line.......
I think this trip to Mars would be like eating acid and walking around the desert. It's pretty bitchin the first few days. But after that you just want to get home, take a shower and sleep in your own bed. So I've heard.
Quote from: pickdropper on February 17, 2015, 05:52:34 PM
Quote from: juansolo on February 17, 2015, 05:43:16 PM
I'd probably be up for that... Thought I'm not sure they'll want to send a (then) 53 year old fat geek into space...
I dunno, "53 Year-Old Fat Geek in Space" sounds like a pretty solid B movie.
I think I saw that last month on Netflix.
Quote from: billstein on February 18, 2015, 12:01:52 AM
Quote from: pickdropper on February 17, 2015, 05:52:34 PM
Quote from: juansolo on February 17, 2015, 05:43:16 PM
I'd probably be up for that... Thought I'm not sure they'll want to send a (then) 53 year old fat geek into space...
I dunno, "53 Year-Old Fat Geek in Space" sounds like a pretty solid B movie.
I think I saw that last month on Netflix.
Or Sci-Fi channel. Or both.
I too would like to see more action from our space program. We're going to make this planet pretty damn uncomfortable to live on as the population grows. We need to start the process of off-planet colonization.
Totally. I'm surprised more attention isn't paid to the fact that we will need to recolonize if our species is to survive. Granted, if a bunch of nerdz (I use the term endearingly) on a pedal forum are discussing it, there's got to be at least a subcommittee or something. I think they'd likely be hush hush about it as to not upset anyone. It's kind of a bummer though, when I bring this kind of stuff up to who don't really know me, people who are on the level of "work friends" or less, they look at me like i'm the one who's insane. It's just completely off of their radar.
When we finally get the plans all in place, Earth will get hit by a monster comet and giant cockroaches will end up ruling the earth, chatting on a future 40 string guitar forum, and trying to figure out how to scurry off to another planet to survive on.
Quote from: juansolo on February 17, 2015, 11:45:54 PM
Essentially everything has become about money. Everything. Which is stunting us as a species, because if it doesn't make money, it's not done.
50 years ago we landed a man on the moon. The motivations for this are well known (the other thing we like to do as a species...). BUT we decided to do it, our best and brightest were given the tools they needed and they showed us what we were capable of.
Space exploration will be largely commercial in the next century now that there are individuals and organizations that are wealthy enough to finance it without government entanglements. I don't know if that is good or bad, but that is how it's going to be. The first mission that successfully mines an asteroid will become the most profitable in all of human history. There's trillions of dollars out there waiting to be taken and as soon as it is feasible someone will do it. If we are lucky, the people who make this happen will have enough vision to use it for the betterment of mankind. If not, we are pretty well fucked. I mean, at some point these few people will acquire so much wealth it will become meaningless (I'm talking an order of magnitude beyond the richest person in the world right now) so it seems inevitable that it will work out for us in the end, somehow. Also, I'm not terribly cynical when it comes to "futurism" so I have a skewed viewpoint.
Penn & Teller made the point on Bullshit that for space exploration to be economical, private enterprise is going to have to be involved at some point (government agencies of any sort are not known for efficiency.)
They also made the point that NASA needs to be kept involved at the research level, because private enterprise isn't on the same planet as NASA when it comes to that.
This is working off memory.
Quote from: alanp on February 18, 2015, 03:52:16 AM
Penn & Teller made the point on Bullshit that for space exploration to be economical, private enterprise is going to have to be involved at some point (government agencies of any sort are not known for efficiency.)
They also made the point that NASA needs to be kept involved at the research level, because private enterprise isn't on the same planet as NASA when it comes to that.
This is working off memory.
That makes a lot of sense.
If nothing else, we know how Arnold Schartzenegger feels:
http://getyoasstomars.ytmnd.com/ (http://getyoasstomars.ytmnd.com/)
Quote from: blearyeyes on February 17, 2015, 11:55:58 PMI have to agree with John. Every time I drive on the freeway in Southern California and think about all the excess metal wrapped around single drivers and fossil fuel explosions excreting poisonous gasses pushing people down the road I think why are we doing this?
Don't get me wrong I love cars and motor racing. I just think that progress in alternative fuels has been seriously stunted by the petroleum industry. In 100 years we've still not figured out a way of getting hydrogen efficiently. A perfect fuel. It's one of the most abundant elements on the planet, the most harmful thing it puts out when burnt as a fuel is water.
Quote from: alanp on February 18, 2015, 03:52:16 AM
Penn & Teller made the point on Bullshit that for space exploration to be economical, private enterprise is going to have to be involved at some point (government agencies of any sort are not known for efficiency.)
They also made the point that NASA needs to be kept involved at the research level, because private enterprise isn't on the same planet as NASA when it comes to that.
The serious issue I have with that is the way private mega corps work (which I know from first hand experience). The people that make the decisions have had so much power for so long that they've convinced themselves that they're the only ones capable of making them. They don't listen to people with expert knowledge and I could see things going horribly wrong. Also the cogs in the machine of private industry are just numbers on a spreadsheet to them... You really think they give a fuck? Finally the ruling factor is always money. So it's never 'how can we do this right' it's 'how can we do this as cheaply as possible and maximise our profits'.
The whole concept of big business being involved in something as complex as space travel scares the shit out of me for the poor bastards doing the actual work (who will be the scape goats when it inevitably goes horribly wrong) and the people in the capsules who's lives depend on it.
For a perfect example of how things work in the work for the expert these days I give you this. This isn't a comedy sketch. I found myself in this situation more times than I can remember (and developed my own way of dealing with it).
Well, we have to get off this planet as a species at some point. Its not healthy for a baby to remain in its crib for the rest of its life, why should we remain on ours? Also, even if we do get everything in order and make Earth the happiest bestest place, as long as we all remain on this planet we can still be snuffed out as a species by a comet or asteroid hitting our planet. It's not like it hasn't happened before.
Why should we go to Mars? Ideally, because we can. It would be nice to say we don't need a new home, or no one wants to make money out of it, but that's not really the case. Lets just go for the hell of it and see what we can do and learn.
I'm no Greenie Hippie Conservationist, but truthfully though, I look around at the madness around me and it brings me down. We basically strip mine the ocean of fish to grind them into food for "sustainable" fish farming... The governments are selling off their stores of Helium so we can have nice balloons, but Helium is non-renewable and is nearly essential for cooling important medical equipment. How much energy does it take, and how much dirt must be dug up to make a "green" car. How are we going to supply the energy to charge an electric car? How are we going to get the resources to build solar panels?
The ocean is broken. Trillons of plastic beads used in skin care product populate the water. Rubbish fills the pacific. Radioactive effluent has made it from Japan to the US. Shipping containers regularly fall off the boats...
Soylent Green, here we come.
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/1848433/the-ocean-is-broken/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pacific_garbage_patch
Lets face it. We've fucked it.
TANSTAAFL ladies and gents, TANSTAAFL.
QuoteThe single most important invention since has been the internet, which should have been a way for the best and brightest to communicate more successfully
And, the single thing that is responsible for its growth... Porn. Followed closely by piracy. People used to think that the internet would collapse under the traffic flowing through it, but failed to realise that the industry would just build bigger and better pipes. Not complaining too much, I like looking at beautiful naked women as much as the next guy.
Quote from: alanp on February 18, 2015, 03:52:16 AM
Penn & Teller made the point on Bullshit that for space exploration to be economical, private enterprise is going to have to be involved at some point (government agencies of any sort are not known for efficiency.)
This is demonstrably wrong. NASA is a money maker for the U.S. government. And a good one at that. NASA has something like a 700% profit margin, plus its noneconomic benefits, such as aiding in the creation of soft power.
Space exploration technology research also, importantly, may lead to very important discoveries in sustainability. I don't know what they'll do to solve the rocket fuel problem, but food, clean water, and everyday power all need to be solved in a completely sustainable way if we are to send humans anywhere further than the moon.
I have way too many thoughts on this subject for a post in the morning before work.
Some great points in here.
In a nutshell, I get what others are saying with our priorities. For me it's the frustration of seeing the fraud and the greed on truly unprecidented levels (technology has advanced this in my belief) and no one seems willing to curb it. The powers that be aid it and are part of it so the fox is guarding the hen house. That is beyond frustrating. So when we see billions and billions spent on something that will benefit the human race in 200 years I get why some think, screw that, what about people dying and starving right now?
Having said all that I also see why we must continue to push foward. Had we not done this up to this point something tells me none of us would be talking to each other via a Madbean forum, you know? That has to be done I think to advance. If we could take care of the outright greed and fraud being committed via all kinds of avenues then I don't think anyone would have a problem with space exploration really.
It's a flustercluck right now and frankly it won't get better. I checked out in late 2010 and said F it, I'm not going to sweat it any more. I'll do my time until I'm toast and do the best I can until then. I refuse to stress about the injustices any more, even though at times it does fly all over me and I have to get control again.
Quote from: midwayfair on February 18, 2015, 01:02:06 PM
Quote from: alanp on February 18, 2015, 03:52:16 AM
Penn & Teller made the point on Bullshit that for space exploration to be economical, private enterprise is going to have to be involved at some point (government agencies of any sort are not known for efficiency.)
This is demonstrably wrong. NASA is a money maker for the U.S. government. And a good one at that. NASA has something like a 700% profit margin, plus its noneconomic benefits, such as aiding in the creation of soft power.
Space exploration technology research also, importantly, may lead to very important discoveries in sustainability. I don't know what they'll do to solve the rocket fuel problem, but food, clean water, and everyday power all need to be solved in a completely sustainable way if we are to send humans anywhere further than the moon.
I have way too many thoughts on this subject for a post in the morning before work.
+1 to Jon's points. The returns from the economic investment in NASA, NOAA, NIST, etc. have been incredible. If you add in the academic and military research spending, nearly all of the current economy of the US and large parts of the world depends on these socialist spending programs. The vast majority of this research wouldn't have ever been done under a private capitalist organization because the returns are too far out in time. Private investors putting money into anything with a longer than 2 year time to return is pretty damn rare.
I wouldn't expect Penn & Teller to come to any other conclusion given their Libertarian viewpoints, but the concept that private industry is more efficient than government and academic research is on-its-face laughable simply from the point that all of that private industry is totally dependent on the research that was done on the other side of the economic fence. From personal experience, if any private company I've worked at had to be as efficient as the academic departments I've been in, they wouldn't have a clue how to operate. Some of those I've worked at that have gone out of business might still be in business though because they all seemed to be able to burn through unimaginable heaps of money on toner cartridges and paper alone.
Other than local space tourism and satellite launching and servicing, the economics of commercial space flight isn't really there yet. It may well be that in the not too distant future that changes because of mining asteroids and such -- although I'd guess that this will be done purely robotically -- but even then the private sector work is going to be based on lots of socialist research that still needs to be done.
Agree completely with the above. But just to counterpoint, government can be and is so many times entirely inefficient on so many levels we all could sit here and just type out program after progam after program of total waste, outright fraud and uttter incompentence. Google Pork Barrel politics and start from there and work your way down and branch off into any sector one wishes.
Just for the sake of discussion if it takes 1 billion to do something good and we spend 5 billion instead is that not 4 billion in utter waste even if the goal/mission was completed successfully? I'm not sure if that is what the other poster was really pointing at but it is what I'm pointing at. So would that 4 billion not be better spent on other things as opposed to a politicians pocket or someone's "profit" pocket due to fraud?
Not arguing with you guys as I think we are talking the same language.
Quote from: TNblueshawk on February 18, 2015, 05:34:27 PM
Agree completely with the above. But just to counterpoint, government can be and is so many times entirely inefficient on so many levels we all could sit here and just type out program after progam after program of total waste, outright fraud and uttter incompentence. Google Pork Barrel politics and start from there and work your way down and branch off into any sector one wishes.
Just for the sake of discussion if it takes 1 billion to do something good and we spend 5 billion instead is that not 4 billion in utter waste even if the goal/mission was completed successfully? I'm not sure if that is what the other poster was really pointing at but it is what I'm pointing at. So would that 4 billion not be better spent on other things as opposed to a politicians pocket or someone's "profit" pocket due to fraud?
Right. As a citizen of Illinois, I can certainly attest to government not always being a more efficient spending path. ;D
But yeah, it's a good point about government funded research that may not ever have been done in the private sector.
Still, the idea that we should shut down the space program because there are problems with starvation and poverty doesn't sit well with me either. Science needs to progress and should yield some solutions for dealing with unavoidable problems that we are almost certainly going to face in the future.
Quote from: pickdropper on February 18, 2015, 05:52:36 PM
Quote from: TNblueshawk on February 18, 2015, 05:34:27 PM
Agree completely with the above. But just to counterpoint, government can be and is so many times entirely inefficient on so many levels we all could sit here and just type out program after progam after program of total waste, outright fraud and uttter incompentence. Google Pork Barrel politics and start from there and work your way down and branch off into any sector one wishes.
Just for the sake of discussion if it takes 1 billion to do something good and we spend 5 billion instead is that not 4 billion in utter waste even if the goal/mission was completed successfully? I'm not sure if that is what the other poster was really pointing at but it is what I'm pointing at. So would that 4 billion not be better spent on other things as opposed to a politicians pocket or someone's "profit" pocket due to fraud?
Right. As a citizen of Illinois, I can certainly attest to government not always being a more efficient spending path. ;D
But yeah, it's a good point about government funded research that may not ever have been done in the private sector.
Still, the idea that we should shut down the space program because there are problems with starvation and poverty doesn't sit well with me either. Science needs to progress and should yield some solutions for dealing with unavoidable problems that we are almost certainly going to face in the future.
What I was trying to say and think what we need is a different look at priorities, or better said a change of paradigm.
It is not about the'classic' right or wrong dichotmoy of government or private sector, that has worked so far to get us comfortably (at least in the first world that we are discussing this from...!) in this ...well... situation...
It has brought us to a place where less then 100 people (you could fit those into a double decker bus) own and have access to 50% of wealth on the planet.
Those will be by the way the people who sit in the double decker starship to a 'new' world to save their bums if this place gets really so inhabitable that Mars is a better swap; together with a few select hairdressers and phone sanitizers. Just a quote on 'hitchhickers guide to the galaxy' there for you.
I don't want to be on board of that ship, not that I myself will see that day anyway. My son might do and some other of this species.
I think what juansolo touches on is the story of change in paradigm: we need the Teslas and brilliant people to further their ideas without being stunted by the paradigm of profit only.
We need to have the Fred Hollows of this world and everyone in us look after each other and being able to do so without being stunted by the paradigm of profit only.
And yes, as humankind and technical ability we can do that, now. It may well involve harvesting asteroids and spaceflight.
But it won't happen with asteroids and spaceflights by itself and just believing in the force of the market and then hoping that those new mega rich people will be good to us because money doesn't count then.
That's a bit too much wishful thinking of doing the same old in the face of how much good and bad we can do in magnitude affecting the whole planet, a quality which has changed since the Vikings and Columbus.
Also the state of the planet is agruably more messed up than at that time.
You can find examples in any direction of good and bad that science has brought forward, medicinal lifesavers as well as terribly efficient pesticides used for genocide (Zyklon B, the factory build with close government entanglement right beside Ausschwitz; Agent Orange, made in New Zealand;... take your pick) and if you look at that much if not all has been possible through the current paradigm of profiteering and monetary interests.
If too much money does really make itself superflous then the point of that would be long reached.
Money itself isn't bad or good, it's the meaning and equaling to power that we attached to it that makes it a problem, that it's THE priority, the golden paradigm.
That has to change, otherwise asteroids and other planets will just get the same story re-loaded.
No I don't have brilliant solutions for that myself, otherwise I would try to find an influential adviser position.
I just hope the right Teslas and Hollows will be heard for that though and not stunted by the usual ol' ways.
Just started a book by Naomi Klein 'This changes everything'. Unfortunately the book doesn't change evrything for the better by itself or so, just interesting reading, not that I agree with everything in there.
And I also think we don't need to agree on absolutely everything to come to a more constructive paradigm.
And to juansolos concerns of becoming a hippy:
don't worry, hippies usually don't do pies AND race cars at the same time, maybe one of those but both? No, you're safe... ;)
I get you, Cooder. There are so many interlocking pieces that it's not a simple answer of what is right and what is wrong.
In an overly simplistic and myopic viewpoint, I look at it like a lot of engineering companies. Engineering companies often keep R&D and Engineering support of manufacturing as two separate entities. The reason for that is that manufacturing support needs to happen to keep things going now, but R&D is absolutely necessary to keep things going in the future. Once companies stop innovating, they usually die.
Of course, that's not quite a direct correlation, but I do think there is some level of comparison. Not all science is progress, but some of it qualifies and we need to continue to find ways of learning and expanding our knowledge base. Perhaps a better comparison is the medical industry. You need people to come up with treatments for existing diseases, but you also need people working on the cures that might prevent the disease from happening in the future.
I'm not a big fan of the people are dying here on Earth so lets spend our money here first argument. It is a valid argument, but if progress were to made dependent on solving our social woes first we would never progressed beyond the level of cavemen. Unless we institute world wide rule by AI supplanting human governance there will always be wars. We muck things up. Even democracies do stupid wars, we only have to go back a decade to see just that. There will probably also be poverty, disease and famine, because there are simply way too many of us. And if we were to solve world hunger and disease there would be an awful lot even more of us very quickly.
All the more reason for some of us to get off our asses and come up with a way to get some of us off this planet so we as a species will survive. Because lets face it, we as a species suck at making long term decisions that benefit all of us. Sure, we can blame greedy corporations, sure we can blame inefficient and corrupt governments. But we buy from those corporations, we work at those corporations. They aren't faceless entities, they are conglomerates of people who are answerable to other people (shareholders). And in our democracies our politicians don't grab power outside out of our control. We vote for them. If we keep voting for inefficient politicians who are slaves to big corporations, then we only have ourselves to blame.
I remember a Lewis Black show where he held up a smart phone. He told about all the wondrous things that thing could do. And then he said we could have had clean renewable energy decades ago except we, the people, decided that it was more important that we could call each from anywhere in the world and check our facebook status.
We live in a wonderful age. No longer do we have to start a political and social movement through laborious organization that takes decades to take off the ground to influence power, as the first social democratic movements did. We have the power of social media and technology. Things like the 99% movement and the Arab Spring, and perversely even ISIS, show us that movements can now spring up overnight that will give the Powers That Be frickin' nightmares, or even overthrow the old order. It can be done. If only we stop using that technology to stroke our own egos and for once use it for something good.
Quote from: ggarms on February 17, 2015, 05:39:03 PM
I've had that discussion with friends on a few occasions, but its usually of the following variety: If you were given the option to be sent into interstellar space (lets say we can go half light speed, relativistic/ time dilation issues be damned-you aren't returning) on a ship with all provisions needed to survive and be occupied (a bench and supplies plz) for the rest of your life, would you? The only caveat; you're alone, and you communication with others will be limited to the first year or two of your travels. I think i'd say yes.
This is essentially a nightmare for me. Call me ape-like but I can not survive without human contact. Never seeing your loved ones again. Alone in a metal can drifting through an empty black void of anything but silence. It's one step away from death. Arrgghh! I need to take some pills...
Starting to feel a little bit like the artist from The Fast Show