3 ms·

I mean, we have already been exploring the solar system with machines, for a good while. Humans are much more capable today (and for the foreseeable future) at

I mean, we have already been exploring the solar system with machines, for a good while. Humans are much more capable today (and for the foreseeable future) at conducting a wide range of tasks in space than the machines we can currently send up. It could be argued it would be faster to send humans up to build the infrastructure for more humans now (in the near future) than it would be to wait for robotics to get advanced enough to build that infrastructure for us in space environments.

melling 7y ago
We accelerate the development of our machines and iterate faster with the extra money saved by not sending humans. At some point in the future, our machines will do most of what we can. The advanced robotics, etc will pay an extra dividend on earth too.
bobajeff 7y ago
Are you trying to tell me that in the era of Boston Dynamics' Spot Mini and Waymo/Tesla Autopilot we couldn't come up with robots capable of building space infrastructure for us?
- bhhaskin 7y ago
  Those are really good examples of exactly why we can't. All of those just have really good marketing behind them. Spotmini at this point is kind of just a neat toy. It doesn't really do anything. It is definitely not autonomous and requires human intervention. Self driving cars are a bit of a pipe dream unless there is a massive breakthrough in actual A.I. they don't work outside of ideal conditions. Driving in rain, snow, sunrise, sunset are all out of reach for the most part. As they lack human intuition and they can't react on the fly. For example there is no way it would be able to navigate a parking lot that needs to be repainted. But humans do all the time.
noelsusman 7y ago
What can a human in a spacesuit accomplish on the moon that a machine can't? It's a genuine question, though I'll admit my initial answer is not much.
- trothamel 7y ago
  The human-driven rover on Apollo 17 drove 35.9 KM in the three days Apollo 17 spent on the moon. Lunkhod 2 went 39 KM, but it took from January to June 1973 to do so. When the distance from Earth increases, machines become slower. Opportunity drove 45 KM, but it took 14 years.
  - hootbootscoot 7y ago
    nothing Tesla autopilot can't handle... (less pedestrians on the moon than even a city in arizona!)
    - hutzlibu 7y ago
      Some more craters and layers of light moondust to sink in, though.
- saberdancer 7y ago
  Climb down a cliff using rope system.
tsimionescu 7y ago
But what do we get from having humans in space? There is no foreseeable path at the moment to a permanent settlement supporting even hundred people. Sure, we can invest in research in this direction, and in the effects of space on human bodies - we already have the ISS for that. But what could be gained from another human on the moon? What was gained from the first one?
- adrianN 7y ago
  Building a permanent settlement for 2-10 people is a really good exercise if you eventually want a permanent settlement for 100 people.

melling 7y ago

We accelerate the development of our machines and iterate faster with the extra money saved by not sending humans. At some point in the future, our machines will do most of what we can. The advanced robotics, etc will pay an extra dividend on earth too.

bobajeff 7y ago

Are you trying to tell me that in the era of Boston Dynamics' Spot Mini and Waymo/Tesla Autopilot we couldn't come up with robots capable of building space infrastructure for us?

bhhaskin 7y ago
Those are really good examples of exactly why we can't. All of those just have really good marketing behind them. Spotmini at this point is kind of just a neat toy. It doesn't really do anything. It is definitely not autonomous and requires human intervention. Self driving cars are a bit of a pipe dream unless there is a massive breakthrough in actual A.I. they don't work outside of ideal conditions. Driving in rain, snow, sunrise, sunset are all out of reach for the most part. As they lack human intuition and they can't react on the fly. For example there is no way it would be able to navigate a parking lot that needs to be repainted. But humans do all the time.

noelsusman 7y ago

What can a human in a spacesuit accomplish on the moon that a machine can't? It's a genuine question, though I'll admit my initial answer is not much.

trothamel 7y ago
The human-driven rover on Apollo 17 drove 35.9 KM in the three days Apollo 17 spent on the moon. Lunkhod 2 went 39 KM, but it took from January to June 1973 to do so. When the distance from Earth increases, machines become slower. Opportunity drove 45 KM, but it took 14 years.
- hootbootscoot 7y ago
  nothing Tesla autopilot can't handle... (less pedestrians on the moon than even a city in arizona!)
  - hutzlibu 7y ago
    Some more craters and layers of light moondust to sink in, though.
saberdancer 7y ago
Climb down a cliff using rope system.

tsimionescu 7y ago

But what do we get from having humans in space? There is no foreseeable path at the moment to a permanent settlement supporting even hundred people. Sure, we can invest in research in this direction, and in the effects of space on human bodies - we already have the ISS for that. But what could be gained from another human on the moon? What was gained from the first one?

adrianN 7y ago
Building a permanent settlement for 2-10 people is a really good exercise if you eventually want a permanent settlement for 100 people.