4 ms·

I think the bigger lie is that you absolutely need VCs to finance your idea.

OnlineGladiator 7y ago
What do you think is a better way to fund a manned mission to Mars? It's hard to argue with the progress that SpaceX has made - and that wouldn't exist without VC funding. Meanwhile NASA continues to operate at the whims of Congress. It's doing fine, but it's not looking for any moonshots like it was 50 years ago.
- dlp211 7y ago
  While agree they are at the whims of government, they literally have a moonshot in planning.
  - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
    Sure, but it's obviously going to fail to meet its deadline. It's politics completely disconnected from reality. Let's see how much Congress is willing to increase NASA's funding to actually make it a success, especially as they continue to miss deadlines. https://www.zdnet.com/article/another-nasa-moonshot-nope-you-cant-bs-your-way-to-space/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/another-nasa-moonshot-nope-you... > "If NASA is not currently capable of landing American astronauts on the moon in five years, we need to change the organization, not the mission." -Mike Pence I actually think this is a thinly veiled plan to defund NASA in the long run.
- goatlover 7y ago
  The goal of NASA is scientific exploration, not human colonization. Robots and satellites are much cheaper and safer than trying to make Mars a viable place to live, and you can explore many more places.
  - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
    I agree, but the title of the article we are commenting on is "You Promised Me Mars Colonies but I got Facebook" I didn't mean to say NASA is failing (although they are a political entity and have a lot of ups and downs as a result), but literally to say "how else could you possibly fund this if NASA isn't going to do it?" If NASA is meant for exploration and we don't need VC funding (the point of the original comment I responded to), what do you consider the best way to fund a Mars colony?

What do you think is a better way to fund a manned mission to Mars? It's hard to argue with the progress that SpaceX has made - and that wouldn't exist without VC funding. Meanwhile NASA continues to operate at the whims of Congress. It's doing fine, but it's not looking for any moonshots like it was 50 years ago.

dlp211 7y ago
While agree they are at the whims of government, they literally have a moonshot in planning.
- OnlineGladiator 7y ago
  Sure, but it's obviously going to fail to meet its deadline. It's politics completely disconnected from reality. Let's see how much Congress is willing to increase NASA's funding to actually make it a success, especially as they continue to miss deadlines. https://www.zdnet.com/article/another-nasa-moonshot-nope-you-cant-bs-your-way-to-space/ https://www.zdnet.com/article/another-nasa-moonshot-nope-you... > "If NASA is not currently capable of landing American astronauts on the moon in five years, we need to change the organization, not the mission." -Mike Pence I actually think this is a thinly veiled plan to defund NASA in the long run.
goatlover 7y ago
The goal of NASA is scientific exploration, not human colonization. Robots and satellites are much cheaper and safer than trying to make Mars a viable place to live, and you can explore many more places.
- OnlineGladiator 7y ago
  I agree, but the title of the article we are commenting on is "You Promised Me Mars Colonies but I got Facebook" I didn't mean to say NASA is failing (although they are a political entity and have a lot of ups and downs as a result), but literally to say "how else could you possibly fund this if NASA isn't going to do it?" If NASA is meant for exploration and we don't need VC funding (the point of the original comment I responded to), what do you consider the best way to fund a Mars colony?