4 ms·

> Dodd said he is confused about why ULA would care whether these hobbyists make a little money from their efforts. To avoid the tragedy of the commons.

kmeisthax 2y ago
...the what? We're worried about cows overgrazing a pasture full of photos of ULA launches?
- akira2501 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons It's a finite resource that's being provided for free. The photographers making money have every interest in monopolizing that space. Leaving this situation unchecked produces consequences that are so predictable they have their own specific label.
  - kmeisthax 2y ago
    I... don't think this is about the physical space that the cameras take up. I think someone at ULA management thinks they can make $$$ selling stock photos of launches, but someone else still wants press organizations to have pictures, so the compromise was "media organizations only, must show evidence of publication, no sublicensing".
  - stavros 2y ago
    This isn't a tragedy of the commons, as this isn't even in the commons: it's a private space. The ULA should just charge for access.
    - akira2501 2y ago
      > it's a private space. That is being provided for free on a first come first serve basis. I'm not sure why it's difficult to apprehend the challenges that naturally come with this type of arrangement. > The ULA should just charge for access. This would increase the operational load from serving this group. It seems to me this is the opposite of what they want.
      - stavros 2y ago
        From Wikipedia: > The tragedy of the commons is the concept which states that if many people enjoy unfettered access to a finite, valuable resource such as a pasture, they will tend to overuse it and may end up destroying its value altogether. The photographers don't destroy the value of the space, as it's there after they leave, as whole as before they came. The tragedy of the commons more commonly refers to resources that can be consumed/destroyed. Otherwise using any resource at all is a tragedy of the commons.
        akira2501 2y ago
        > The tragedy of the commons more commonly refers to resources that can be consumed/destroyed. Physical space and access are both resources. Two objects can't occupy the same physical space. Access is provided on a first come, first served basis. > Otherwise using any resource at all is a tragedy of the commons. When one person using the resource, even temporarily, deprives another of using it, then we are in similar, but obviously not identical, territory. Critically, since we CANNOT increase the amount of space for photographers on the site, we face the same _immediate consequences_ as the given example. If we didn't then this article would not exist and we would not be having this discussion.
        stavros 2y ago
        Again, that's not what a tragedy of the commons is. Temporarily using a finite resource isn't a tragedy of the commons. It's just usage.
        akira2501 2y ago
        That's precisely what it is. The definition has an origin which you are rather parochially clinging to. The term has definitely been broadened to include an entire class of similar social dilemmas, examples of which abound, including my original comparison.
        michaelmrose 2y ago
  - madaxe_again 2y ago
    Uh. Unless you are into some heavy animist stuff, taking photos does not “use up” the object being photographed. You’re capturing photons which are emitted or reflected by the object being photographed - or are you concerned that we will run out of photons? I can assure you, we will not.
  - michaelmrose 2y ago
    How does stopping people from selling photos deal with this? Logically you simply figure out priority and if that is insufficient you could use a lottery. Also you propose the problem but offer no evidence that it exists.
wongarsu 2y ago
But what is the limited resource here? If one person takes a picture of an ULA launch that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone else from taking a picture of the same launch. And if they sell that picture as a poster that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone from posting or selling their pictures. Of course you could argue that everyone selling their pictures as prints drives down the price. But that's just normal market dynamics. The only people harmed by that are ULA's merch department selling fewer of their own posters. If ULA's revenue depended on the sale of prints I would kind of get the argument, but that's not how rocket launches have traditionally been financed.
- akira2501 2y ago
  > But what is the limited resource here? The space where the cameras are setup. > that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone else from taking a picture Only so many cameras can be setup in that space. I assume that once enough people are let in they have to start denying other people the ability to enter. I think people are massively confused here. You can photograph and sell pictures of ULA launches all day if you like. What you can't do is apply for special access to an area of limited space and then sell the pictures taken from there. This seems pretty simple to me. You simply have to choose what you want. Sell pictures or be in the special area.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > The space where the cameras are setup. That's... pretty unlikely considering the size of the launch site versus the space a camera and a tripod take up. https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/28/18744502/spacex-falcon-heavy-rocket-launch-photography-remote-camera-long-exposure https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/28/18744502/spacex-falcon-he... has pictures of a similar setup. Oodles of space.
    - akira2501 2y ago
      > That's... pretty unlikely considering the size of the launch site versus the space a camera and a tripod take up. I think photograph 2 of 9 in the bottom carousel makes the problem pretty clear. You have issues of road access, number of people, number of vehicles, cooperating between different groups photographing and probably competition over the "ideal" places to photograph from. There's also other images in that carousel of people wandering around and even taking pictures from the middle of a roadway. I think everyone is assuming that ULA can just open the gates and let random groups of people in and it will all be just fine and naturally work itself out. I think these people have never had the responsibility of managing a crowd of any size (particularly one including semi professional photographers) and it's why I specifically invoke the tragedy of the commons.

kmeisthax 2y ago

...the what? We're worried about cows overgrazing a pasture full of photos of ULA launches?

akira2501 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons It's a finite resource that's being provided for free. The photographers making money have every interest in monopolizing that space. Leaving this situation unchecked produces consequences that are so predictable they have their own specific label.
- kmeisthax 2y ago
  I... don't think this is about the physical space that the cameras take up. I think someone at ULA management thinks they can make $$$ selling stock photos of launches, but someone else still wants press organizations to have pictures, so the compromise was "media organizations only, must show evidence of publication, no sublicensing".
- stavros 2y ago
  This isn't a tragedy of the commons, as this isn't even in the commons: it's a private space. The ULA should just charge for access.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    > it's a private space. That is being provided for free on a first come first serve basis. I'm not sure why it's difficult to apprehend the challenges that naturally come with this type of arrangement. > The ULA should just charge for access. This would increase the operational load from serving this group. It seems to me this is the opposite of what they want.
    - stavros 2y ago
      From Wikipedia: > The tragedy of the commons is the concept which states that if many people enjoy unfettered access to a finite, valuable resource such as a pasture, they will tend to overuse it and may end up destroying its value altogether. The photographers don't destroy the value of the space, as it's there after they leave, as whole as before they came. The tragedy of the commons more commonly refers to resources that can be consumed/destroyed. Otherwise using any resource at all is a tragedy of the commons.
      - akira2501 2y ago
        > The tragedy of the commons more commonly refers to resources that can be consumed/destroyed. Physical space and access are both resources. Two objects can't occupy the same physical space. Access is provided on a first come, first served basis. > Otherwise using any resource at all is a tragedy of the commons. When one person using the resource, even temporarily, deprives another of using it, then we are in similar, but obviously not identical, territory. Critically, since we CANNOT increase the amount of space for photographers on the site, we face the same _immediate consequences_ as the given example. If we didn't then this article would not exist and we would not be having this discussion.
        stavros 2y ago
        Again, that's not what a tragedy of the commons is. Temporarily using a finite resource isn't a tragedy of the commons. It's just usage.
        akira2501 2y ago
        That's precisely what it is. The definition has an origin which you are rather parochially clinging to. The term has definitely been broadened to include an entire class of similar social dilemmas, examples of which abound, including my original comparison.
        michaelmrose 2y ago
- madaxe_again 2y ago
  Uh. Unless you are into some heavy animist stuff, taking photos does not “use up” the object being photographed. You’re capturing photons which are emitted or reflected by the object being photographed - or are you concerned that we will run out of photons? I can assure you, we will not.
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  How does stopping people from selling photos deal with this? Logically you simply figure out priority and if that is insufficient you could use a lottery. Also you propose the problem but offer no evidence that it exists.

wongarsu 2y ago

But what is the limited resource here? If one person takes a picture of an ULA launch that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone else from taking a picture of the same launch. And if they sell that picture as a poster that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone from posting or selling their pictures. Of course you could argue that everyone selling their pictures as prints drives down the price. But that's just normal market dynamics. The only people harmed by that are ULA's merch department selling fewer of their own posters. If ULA's revenue depended on the sale of prints I would kind of get the argument, but that's not how rocket launches have traditionally been financed.

akira2501 2y ago
> But what is the limited resource here? The space where the cameras are setup. > that doesn't meaningfully prevent anyone else from taking a picture Only so many cameras can be setup in that space. I assume that once enough people are let in they have to start denying other people the ability to enter. I think people are massively confused here. You can photograph and sell pictures of ULA launches all day if you like. What you can't do is apply for special access to an area of limited space and then sell the pictures taken from there. This seems pretty simple to me. You simply have to choose what you want. Sell pictures or be in the special area.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > The space where the cameras are setup. That's... pretty unlikely considering the size of the launch site versus the space a camera and a tripod take up. https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/28/18744502/spacex-falcon-heavy-rocket-launch-photography-remote-camera-long-exposure https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/28/18744502/spacex-falcon-he... has pictures of a similar setup. Oodles of space.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    > That's... pretty unlikely considering the size of the launch site versus the space a camera and a tripod take up. I think photograph 2 of 9 in the bottom carousel makes the problem pretty clear. You have issues of road access, number of people, number of vehicles, cooperating between different groups photographing and probably competition over the "ideal" places to photograph from. There's also other images in that carousel of people wandering around and even taking pictures from the middle of a roadway. I think everyone is assuming that ULA can just open the gates and let random groups of people in and it will all be just fine and naturally work itself out. I think these people have never had the responsibility of managing a crowd of any size (particularly one including semi professional photographers) and it's why I specifically invoke the tragedy of the commons.