9 ms·

The successful launch (and subsequent deployment steps) that went of without a hitch restored my faith in humanity. I'm so pumped to see what science and image

The successful launch (and subsequent deployment steps) that went of without a hitch restored my faith in humanity. I'm so pumped to see what science and images the Webb produces. Could 2022 be the year we find an exoplanet with conclusive biomarkers?

skybrian 5y ago
- dylan604 5y ago
  Using the same filter, I'd say non-Boeing engineers. After the 737Max revelations, the fact that they can't figure out why their space capsule doesn't work, etc, I'd be very very concerned for any of their space craft not screwing up after the launch. All of those $numberOfMinutesOfTerror would be excruciating from a Boeing engineered anything at this point.
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    Boeing management, not engineers. And they're probably fine if they're supervised by NASA employees working for the government.
- pohl 5y ago
  Yeah, that's a bit broad, but citizens who still work towards doing useful things through public policy deserve some recognition, here.
- stavros 5y ago
  Ah, you know, this is as much humanity's success as global warming is its failure. We built a world that can make both these things.
- munificent 5y ago
  Here's a funny asymmetry I've started noticing online: * Whenever a person or group do something bad, the response is always, "Look how much humanity sucks." * Whenever a person or group does something good, the response is always, "Look how good those particular people are." Now, there is a positive explanation for this: It's good to give credit. When someone does something particularly good, it diminishes their act to say that it's just another example of humanity. But at the same time, the aggregate effect of this bias is that always appears that humanity sucks with the rare exception of a few blessed individuals. But the opposite is much more likely to be true.
  - TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
    Or it could could be more that solving bounded problems that involve moving atoms around - like building a space telescope - is relatively easy. But solving unbounded problems that involve moving emotions and attitudes around - like building a planetary culture that isn't violent, irrational, and collectively suicidal - is hard.
  - 300bps 5y ago
    It’s called being a pessimist. Martin Seligman teaches in the book Learned Optimism that: Optimists think any good thing that happens is permanent, pervasive and personal. Optimists think any bad thing that happens is impermanent, specific and impersonal. Pessimists flip flop these explanatory styles. The people you’re commenting on seem to be pessimistic about humanity.
  - 6510 5y ago
    There is also those who paid for something getting all or non of the credit depending on the settings.
- alcover 5y ago
  But somehow humanity works as a whole for these achievements. The higher education, the infrastructure, the people merely cleaning the launch site facilities, all get a sense out of this.
causi 5y ago
To be brutally honest, this project being fourteen years behind schedule and two thousand percent over budget damaged mine. Selling a program to taxpayers as a 500 million dollar endeavor and then extracting ten billion dollars from them is the kind of thing that should put people in prison for life.
- the_biot 5y ago
  14 years late, 2000% over budget even while getting a free ride from ESA -- and loudly exclaiming this thing has no redundancy whatsoever: anything at all might brick it. It may be a great telescope, but it's a miserable failure as a project.
  - burrows 5y ago
    X failed as a project if and only if X failed as a product or X consumed (hugely) more resources than initially planned? But what other reasons that people might care about X failing as a project when it succeeds as a product?
  - selectodude 5y ago
    What is a "budget" when it comes to this sort of stuff though? They were doing things nobody has ever done before. How could anybody have any idea what it was going to cost?
    - panick21_ 5y ago
      Well, the companies that promised that they could deliver the things they were advertising claimed to know. What should have been done is to have many more missions where these technologies can iteratively been proven so that once you head into a larger project you have some idea of whats gone happen. And you don't end up launching a telescope that already has 20 year old tech in it. And the companies that did it made fine profit of course. Promise the moon, don't deliver, make profit. Not a good model.
      - 5y ago

skybrian 5y ago

dylan604 5y ago
Using the same filter, I'd say non-Boeing engineers. After the 737Max revelations, the fact that they can't figure out why their space capsule doesn't work, etc, I'd be very very concerned for any of their space craft not screwing up after the launch. All of those $numberOfMinutesOfTerror would be excruciating from a Boeing engineered anything at this point.
- lamontcg 5y ago
  Boeing management, not engineers. And they're probably fine if they're supervised by NASA employees working for the government.
pohl 5y ago
Yeah, that's a bit broad, but citizens who still work towards doing useful things through public policy deserve some recognition, here.
stavros 5y ago
Ah, you know, this is as much humanity's success as global warming is its failure. We built a world that can make both these things.
munificent 5y ago
Here's a funny asymmetry I've started noticing online: * Whenever a person or group do something bad, the response is always, "Look how much humanity sucks." * Whenever a person or group does something good, the response is always, "Look how good those particular people are." Now, there is a positive explanation for this: It's good to give credit. When someone does something particularly good, it diminishes their act to say that it's just another example of humanity. But at the same time, the aggregate effect of this bias is that always appears that humanity sucks with the rare exception of a few blessed individuals. But the opposite is much more likely to be true.
- TheOtherHobbes 5y ago
  Or it could could be more that solving bounded problems that involve moving atoms around - like building a space telescope - is relatively easy. But solving unbounded problems that involve moving emotions and attitudes around - like building a planetary culture that isn't violent, irrational, and collectively suicidal - is hard.
- 300bps 5y ago
  It’s called being a pessimist. Martin Seligman teaches in the book Learned Optimism that: Optimists think any good thing that happens is permanent, pervasive and personal. Optimists think any bad thing that happens is impermanent, specific and impersonal. Pessimists flip flop these explanatory styles. The people you’re commenting on seem to be pessimistic about humanity.
- 6510 5y ago
  There is also those who paid for something getting all or non of the credit depending on the settings.
alcover 5y ago
But somehow humanity works as a whole for these achievements. The higher education, the infrastructure, the people merely cleaning the launch site facilities, all get a sense out of this.

causi 5y ago

To be brutally honest, this project being fourteen years behind schedule and two thousand percent over budget damaged mine. Selling a program to taxpayers as a 500 million dollar endeavor and then extracting ten billion dollars from them is the kind of thing that should put people in prison for life.

the_biot 5y ago
14 years late, 2000% over budget even while getting a free ride from ESA -- and loudly exclaiming this thing has no redundancy whatsoever: anything at all might brick it. It may be a great telescope, but it's a miserable failure as a project.
- burrows 5y ago
  X failed as a project if and only if X failed as a product or X consumed (hugely) more resources than initially planned? But what other reasons that people might care about X failing as a project when it succeeds as a product?
- selectodude 5y ago
  What is a "budget" when it comes to this sort of stuff though? They were doing things nobody has ever done before. How could anybody have any idea what it was going to cost?
  - panick21_ 5y ago
    Well, the companies that promised that they could deliver the things they were advertising claimed to know. What should have been done is to have many more missions where these technologies can iteratively been proven so that once you head into a larger project you have some idea of whats gone happen. And you don't end up launching a telescope that already has 20 year old tech in it. And the companies that did it made fine profit of course. Promise the moon, don't deliver, make profit. Not a good model.
    - 5y ago