> I think the author is arguing for NASA to take a cautiously optimist stance on Starship, instead of assuming it won't work at all until it does. NASA has tak

> I think the author is arguing for NASA to take a cautiously optimist stance on Starship, instead of assuming it won't work at all until it does. NASA has taken a cautiously optimistic stance on Starship. The assignment of the HLS to Starship and no other provider was an aggressively optimistic stance from NASA that surprised many of the space industry observers at the time of its announcement. The expectation (and normal NASA behavior) would've been two assign the HLS to multiple vendors, at a reduced funding level and stretch the timelines out. So, I'd argue that NASA is already being quite bullish on Starship given the projects and funding that they have available.