4 ms·

Robotics have improved exponentially since the moon landing - where before humans may have been necessary, autonomous landers etc. are now cheaper and more capa

Robotics have improved exponentially since the moon landing - where before humans may have been necessary, autonomous landers etc. are now cheaper and more capable. Why risk the lives?

ryanmarsh 8y ago
Many would love to risk their lives. I would. Some of us think like explorers. If I lived a long time ago I would rather have died alone with arrows in my back as an explorer of the American West, than in a warm bed in my old age having never explored or tested fate. "The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time." — Mark Twain
melling 8y ago
I had this same discussion 4 years ago on hacker news. I couldn’t convince anyone. Perhaps if some of the people realize how much time has past, they’ll realize that we can move much faster with robots: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540462 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540462
Teknoman117 8y ago
Life risk aside, the rovers are in many ways significantly less capable than humans. For instance, it took decades for us to send a rover than could "see" just a bit into the martian rocks by hitting them with a laser or using a small drill. During the moon landings, you just had an astronaut hit one with a rock pick and look inside. It took decades for us to be comfortable sending a rover with a small shovel which could only dig a few inches into the martian soil. During the moon landings, you just had an astronaut with a shovel... So far, no robot we've sent has been better at tool use than a human. Sure, they don't require life support or consumables, so their longevity is extraordinary, but man, there are so many things that took decades to test for with the robots that a single manned mission would've been able to solve in a few days.
- melling 8y ago
  You’re assuming that we can’t make better robots. For the same amount of money as sending humans to Mars, we can develop better robots. Those robots will also be useful on earth of course. From HN in 2014: Someone dying is devastating. Trying to conquer space a handful of people at a time is the slow and dangerous way of accomplishing this task. We should be building machines to explore the solar system. This can be done for a fraction of the cost, time, and it will allow him to allow us to iterate quickly. In 100 years, more humans will live off earth if we iterate with machines, etc now than if we move slowly trying to reduce the risk in order to keep humans safe.

Robotics have improved exponentially since the moon landing - where before humans may have been necessary, autonomous landers etc. are now cheaper and more capable. Why risk the lives?

ryanmarsh 8y ago

Many would love to risk their lives. I would. Some of us think like explorers. If I lived a long time ago I would rather have died alone with arrows in my back as an explorer of the American West, than in a warm bed in my old age having never explored or tested fate. "The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time." — Mark Twain

melling 8y ago

I had this same discussion 4 years ago on hacker news. I couldn’t convince anyone. Perhaps if some of the people realize how much time has past, they’ll realize that we can move much faster with robots: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540462 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8540462

Teknoman117 8y ago

Life risk aside, the rovers are in many ways significantly less capable than humans. For instance, it took decades for us to send a rover than could "see" just a bit into the martian rocks by hitting them with a laser or using a small drill. During the moon landings, you just had an astronaut hit one with a rock pick and look inside. It took decades for us to be comfortable sending a rover with a small shovel which could only dig a few inches into the martian soil. During the moon landings, you just had an astronaut with a shovel... So far, no robot we've sent has been better at tool use than a human. Sure, they don't require life support or consumables, so their longevity is extraordinary, but man, there are so many things that took decades to test for with the robots that a single manned mission would've been able to solve in a few days.

melling 8y ago
You’re assuming that we can’t make better robots. For the same amount of money as sending humans to Mars, we can develop better robots. Those robots will also be useful on earth of course. From HN in 2014: Someone dying is devastating. Trying to conquer space a handful of people at a time is the slow and dangerous way of accomplishing this task. We should be building machines to explore the solar system. This can be done for a fraction of the cost, time, and it will allow him to allow us to iterate quickly. In 100 years, more humans will live off earth if we iterate with machines, etc now than if we move slowly trying to reduce the risk in order to keep humans safe.