palata

39 ms·

841.
by palata 7mo ago
> so it's unlikely we would have the same level of solar panels either. I think you vastly underestimate the amount of work and money that have been put into photovoltaic panels outside the space programs .
842.
by palata 7mo ago
> You’re just coming up with excuses for why you don’t care. I do care, as in "it's really cool" and I wish I could do it, too. I grew up being passionate about Apollo and the ISS. But then I realised that the ISS is extra
843.
by palata 7mo ago
I am not sure what you are trying to say. So people should be ecstatic about it because "it's almost the same thing, but this time the people having fun onboard are not taking remotely as much risk (other than NASA sending them kn
844.
by palata 7mo ago
Well the comparison is not what people think about Apollo 11 right now , but what they thought back then . Back then, it was a big event that made the news worldwide. Artemis II launched yesterday, and my non-engineer relatives and friend
845.
by palata 7mo ago
Yep. We all know that "the dinosaurs disappeared", but very few know how long it took. The dinosaurs were not witnessing the climate warming year after year, by a long shot... What we are witnessing right now is happening exceedi
846.
by palata 7mo ago
So they made a first real test with Artemis I, and it was deemed unsafe because of the heat shield. So they modified the heat shield and didn't bother making a real test with it. "Move fast and break things", I guess? Sure, t
847.
by palata 7mo ago
> and potentially enable further, more interesting missions. The further we go as humans is Mars, and it's useless. The next star is so, so, so far away that even considering reaching it with "something" requires a revolut
848.
by palata 7mo ago
> That's such a cynical viewpoint. We are not doing this so that astronauts can have fun. Don't get me wrong: I would totally love to be in their shoes, I completely understand why they want to do it. > Nowadays, they are
849.
by palata 7mo ago
That, and most people don't care about the Apollo missions that happened after Apollo 11. Hell, nobody knows the name of the third guy who did not get to set foot on the Moon with Apollo 11.
850.
by palata 7mo ago
I grew up admiring the Apollo mission and the likes. Nowadays, I recognise that it is heavy engineering, but I am not so impressed by the fact that we are throwing so much resources at something that we already know we can do. In fact, we h
851.
by palata 7mo ago
> Weirdly myopic metric for what is and isn’t popular? Since when did DOGE become arbiters of anything. Where did I imply that? I said that DOGE not doing something did NOT imply something. Too many negations for you, maybe?
852.
by palata 7mo ago
> And the people who do cannot be assumed to work on the projects that matter to you. That's the case with or without a space program that sends humans to space for the sake of sending humans to space. > Space programmes are popu
853.
by palata 7mo ago
> Are you arguing the Moon programs didn’t increase American engagement in STEM? Nope. You are arguing that without a space program, people don't go into STEM and instead become "bureaucrats or financiers". I am saying
854.
by palata 7mo ago
> If there isn't a space program, the engineers who were inspired to join NASA [...] probably wound up, in the alternate timeline, bureaucrats or financiers. I guess this is why in this timeline, all engineers in the world are at
855.
by palata 7mo ago
> place a bet on polymarket Isn't that a platform for insider trading? Not sure it qualifies here.
856.
by palata 7mo ago
You say that "white old males" are "statistically the most competent" (without statistics, just "because you see it"), and also "most humble". And you seem to genuinely believe it. Well I don't,
857.
by palata 7mo ago
No worries, I'm having a hard time expressing it clearly :)
858.
by palata 7mo ago
I will guess that farm subsidies go to... well, farming. Doesn't sound completely ridiculous at first sight. > you're mad about space exploration? Exploration? It's not exploration at all: it's sending 4 humans for a
859.
by palata 7mo ago
That we probably could have developed without the space program for a fraction of the cost, if we're being honest.
860.
by palata 7mo ago
> The distinction is kind of meaningless Only if it helps you to call this "science", I would say. > advancing our engineering capabilities in space is advancing the science In this case, we are advancing our engineering cap
861.
by palata 7mo ago
But I'm guessing the people benefit from those, too.
862.
by palata 7mo ago
But they need to convince the people that it's worth the money, and the people are more excited when humans risk their lives, even if it is for nothing.
863.
by palata 7mo ago
The difference being that sports are not exclusively paid by taxes, I guess?
864.
by palata 7mo ago
It's not science, it's engineering. I don't think it's advancing science in a way that wouldn't be possible with a fraction of the cost without sending humans there.
865.
by palata 7mo ago
See this recent blog post about it (I am not the author): https://idlewords.com/2026/03/artemis_ii_is_not_safe_to_fly.... It says that it is not safe to fly. They are sending humans without having tested in real c
866.
by palata 7mo ago
I understand why they want to fly. I don't understand why the people is fine paying taxes for that.
867.
by palata 7mo ago
> Just saying - my observation: statistically Sounds weird to me. Is it a "just saying - my observation" kind of take, or is it statistics? It cannot be both, can it? Obviously we don't have any statistics about that, firs
868.
by palata 7mo ago
> I don't see how those things reconcile. For one, and once again: those people spend most of their life knowing they won't access a position of power. White males who don't have the profile of the "dominant white m
869.
by palata 7mo ago
I didn't mean that it was because of gender or skin colour. What I meant, really, is that we select the people who get power in some way. And then we complain that people in positions of power are like that. My point was that there are
870.
by palata 7mo ago
Sure, I agree with that. But do we have an example of something that is provably valuable? I am genuinely interested: after reading this article, I realised that there is nothing I can attribute to psychology off the top of my head. I mean,

More ›