> This is a demonstration that when costs of getting the people there are low enough, people > robots. Maintenance missions close to Earth and space exploratio

> This is a demonstration that when costs of getting the people there are low enough, people > robots. Maintenance missions close to Earth and space exploration are 2 very different tasks. This does in no way "reality check" my assertion that trying to make people live long term on other planetary bodies, or even send them there on limited excursions, makes no sense in todays reality. You want a reality check? Fine, here is a reality check: [Perseverance Mission cost][1]: 2.725 Billion $, is already up there doing work, and only the lastest in a line of ever more capable robots. [2014 Projected Manned Mars Mission Cost][2]: 100 Billion $, could take 20 years or more. That was 10 years ago. Today we know it's likely to be even more expensive and take much longer. This is the reality. Today, Robots outperform people when it comes to going to other planets, by any scientific or economic metric. [1]: https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-perseverance https://www.planetary.org/space-policy/cost-of-perseverance [2]: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/140422-mars-mission-manned-cost-science-space https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/140422-ma...