5 ms·

This is good, there should always be friendly competition between Nations to drive Space Exploration. I hope this lights a bigger fire under the ass of the curr

This is good, there should always be friendly competition between Nations to drive Space Exploration. I hope this lights a bigger fire under the ass of the current US Administration and NASA to push ahead harder, faster and farther. The US doesn't know how lucky they are to have SpaceX and Musk.

newacct583 5y ago
SpaceX is no doubt cool. Nonetheless we're discussing China landing its first rover on a planet NASA's been flying a helicopter around for the last month. I mean, both are great accomplishments, but if you have to treat it as a competition and pick a winner...
- M_bara 5y ago
  Not to pour water on your statement, I'd say that the rate of change counts more. Nailing your first landing attempt on a powered descent (rocket-crate equivalent) is no mean feat. I'm actually pleasantly surprised given the high failure rate of Mars missions.
  - idiotsecant 5y ago
    I'd agree rate of change counts more if both parties were at comparable technology levels. When you're still playing catchup there's a lot of opportunities to take certain engineering shortcuts.
    - cdmckay 5y ago
      100% agree, like hiring Nazi scientists to kickstart your space program. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip
  - aardvarkr 5y ago
    I went from earning $10K/yr as a student to a $120K income full time over the course of a month, why aren't you worshipping me and writing news articles about my accomplishment? Is it because rate of change doesn't count as much as you think it does?
    - a_t48 5y ago
      Hey man, congrats on the new job.
    - hungryhobo 5y ago
      i think the difference is that only 2 countries have successfully landed on Mars while the amount of people earning 120k is quite high
      - aardvarkr 5y ago
        Four governmental organizations have landed on Mars. Can’t forget the Russians and Europeans did it first. But that’s besides the point because I provided a hyperbole where my rate of change was significant but not newsworthy. We aren’t celebrating them because they went from there the fastest but because they went there at all. How fast isn’t noteworthy because they’re standing on the shoulders of giants. They literally copied the design of our rover from 20 years ago and I wouldn’t be surprised if they had stolen a lot of those tech specs from nasa long ago
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
bmitc 5y ago
The U.S. is lucky to have a billionaire made so through public funds?
- aardvarkr 5y ago
  Absolutely. He wasn't given $100B, he took a grant from the government to build something that they wanted and was able to parlay that into two incredible companies that are changing the world as we know it. You can attack the man for who he is, what he says, and whatever else you want, but saying that we didn't get something of value for the investment that the US made is ridiculous. He got filthy rich but we all got something in return.
saltedonion 5y ago
No thanks. Not looking forward to a friendly competition to develop auxiliary technology for wmds with an authoritarian regime. I like such regimes technologically obtuse. Maybe we can also give Iran and NK an award for pushing the boundaries of human knowledge on nuclear science. Your assessment of risk to humanity vs reward for human scientific progress is out of whack.
- ModernMech 5y ago
  China, Iran, and NK may be authoritarian regimes, but the US is still the only nation in the world to have used nuclear weapons in an act of war, a move which killed probably 100,000 civilians.
- tfcata 5y ago
  The remote authoritarian regime you fear the most have the covid-19 pandemic well under control for its people. And you still have to deal with the virus at your doorstep in your non-authoritarian paradise. How good is that?

newacct583 5y ago

SpaceX is no doubt cool. Nonetheless we're discussing China landing its first rover on a planet NASA's been flying a helicopter around for the last month. I mean, both are great accomplishments, but if you have to treat it as a competition and pick a winner...

M_bara 5y ago
Not to pour water on your statement, I'd say that the rate of change counts more. Nailing your first landing attempt on a powered descent (rocket-crate equivalent) is no mean feat. I'm actually pleasantly surprised given the high failure rate of Mars missions.
- idiotsecant 5y ago
  I'd agree rate of change counts more if both parties were at comparable technology levels. When you're still playing catchup there's a lot of opportunities to take certain engineering shortcuts.
  - cdmckay 5y ago
    100% agree, like hiring Nazi scientists to kickstart your space program. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Paperclip
- aardvarkr 5y ago
  I went from earning $10K/yr as a student to a $120K income full time over the course of a month, why aren't you worshipping me and writing news articles about my accomplishment? Is it because rate of change doesn't count as much as you think it does?
  - a_t48 5y ago
    Hey man, congrats on the new job.
  - hungryhobo 5y ago
    i think the difference is that only 2 countries have successfully landed on Mars while the amount of people earning 120k is quite high
    - aardvarkr 5y ago
      Four governmental organizations have landed on Mars. Can’t forget the Russians and Europeans did it first. But that’s besides the point because I provided a hyperbole where my rate of change was significant but not newsworthy. We aren’t celebrating them because they went from there the fastest but because they went there at all. How fast isn’t noteworthy because they’re standing on the shoulders of giants. They literally copied the design of our rover from 20 years ago and I wouldn’t be surprised if they had stolen a lot of those tech specs from nasa long ago
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

bmitc 5y ago

The U.S. is lucky to have a billionaire made so through public funds?

aardvarkr 5y ago
Absolutely. He wasn't given $100B, he took a grant from the government to build something that they wanted and was able to parlay that into two incredible companies that are changing the world as we know it. You can attack the man for who he is, what he says, and whatever else you want, but saying that we didn't get something of value for the investment that the US made is ridiculous. He got filthy rich but we all got something in return.

saltedonion 5y ago

No thanks. Not looking forward to a friendly competition to develop auxiliary technology for wmds with an authoritarian regime. I like such regimes technologically obtuse. Maybe we can also give Iran and NK an award for pushing the boundaries of human knowledge on nuclear science. Your assessment of risk to humanity vs reward for human scientific progress is out of whack.

ModernMech 5y ago
China, Iran, and NK may be authoritarian regimes, but the US is still the only nation in the world to have used nuclear weapons in an act of war, a move which killed probably 100,000 civilians.
tfcata 5y ago
The remote authoritarian regime you fear the most have the covid-19 pandemic well under control for its people. And you still have to deal with the virus at your doorstep in your non-authoritarian paradise. How good is that?