6 ms·

> my belief that it is intended to be little more than a quick, dirty, and vainglorious Apollo repeat by a failing government. If the USA successfully sends pe

> my belief that it is intended to be little more than a quick, dirty, and vainglorious Apollo repeat by a failing government. If the USA successfully sends people to the Moon, achieves all of NASA's technical goals, and the astronauts make it back in one piece, isn't that literally the opposite of failure? It might be expensive and you can argue that it's wasteful. But even to that point, the $11B cost of SLS is nothing for the US Gov. For example the F35 is a >$1T government program. That doesn't seem a lot to explore a new frontier and expand the scope of humanity.

randomNumber7 6mo ago
> That doesn't seem a lot to explore a new frontier and expand the scope of humanity. There is no gain in knowledge from this mission. It's more like cheering for your favorite soccer team.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  > There is no gain in knowledge from this mission This is wrong. We’re learning a lot about the new life-support systems. (Courtesy of the ESA.) We’re also going to learn more about the heat shield on 10 April.
  - seb1204 6mo ago
    Yes true, but these are all technologies required for humans in space. Toilets in space, as intriguing the topic and discussion are, are only needed because we decided to go there. I think the tech is interesting but the human unification vibe is tainted at the least.
anjel 6mo ago
Its not Pork and its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab rather than a political vain-glorious stunt. Same as Mercury/Gemini/Apollo except this time China instead of Russia.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  > its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab Step away from your screens. Framing everything exclusively in these hard terms isn’t healthy (or true).
  - unethical_ban 6mo ago
    Jumping in late here. I think both can be true, that it's an inspirational moment and the idea of humans exploring and visiting other worlds is amazing. That a society's ability to do so implies its scientific prowess. And that we are in competition with other top nations to "have a seat at the table" if/when those nations start trying to put controls on the use of those celestial bodies.

randomNumber7 6mo ago

> That doesn't seem a lot to explore a new frontier and expand the scope of humanity. There is no gain in knowledge from this mission. It's more like cheering for your favorite soccer team.

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
> There is no gain in knowledge from this mission This is wrong. We’re learning a lot about the new life-support systems. (Courtesy of the ESA.) We’re also going to learn more about the heat shield on 10 April.
- seb1204 6mo ago
  Yes true, but these are all technologies required for humans in space. Toilets in space, as intriguing the topic and discussion are, are only needed because we decided to go there. I think the tech is interesting but the human unification vibe is tainted at the least.

anjel 6mo ago

Its not Pork and its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab rather than a political vain-glorious stunt. Same as Mercury/Gemini/Apollo except this time China instead of Russia.

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
> its not science. Its a strategically costly land grab Step away from your screens. Framing everything exclusively in these hard terms isn’t healthy (or true).
- unethical_ban 6mo ago
  Jumping in late here. I think both can be true, that it's an inspirational moment and the idea of humans exploring and visiting other worlds is amazing. That a society's ability to do so implies its scientific prowess. And that we are in competition with other top nations to "have a seat at the table" if/when those nations start trying to put controls on the use of those celestial bodies.