What is Digg?119 Comments
- CAisBacK, on 08/03/2008, -6/+82Maybe the US should photoshop astronauts going to space....
- wonderchemist, on 08/04/2008, -0/+57SpaceX is only good at getting things into the ocean at this point.
- MendotaLee, on 08/04/2008, -5/+58Extend the lifetime of the shuttle until we have a replacement. Problem solved. ***** I could run NASA.
- waveman216, on 08/04/2008, -7/+28If the president can get rid of laws protecting my liberties, I'm sure he can do away with this minor annoyance.
- jonthebishop, on 08/04/2008, -1/+19NASA has a contract with spacex to get things to the space station after 2010 http://www.spacex.com/dragon.php
- paulsabo, on 08/04/2008, -0/+17I don't think NASA's act is apart - you can't design and build a machine capable of delivering humans and cargo to space and getting them back, one that you expect to last you decades, overnight.
Anyway, I'm pretty sure they'd just go ahead with the Soyuz... what's going to happen, they're going to get sued? - junkstuff1, on 08/03/2008, -16/+33Yes, it's Iran's fault that this law exists, and that it includes restrictions on buying Russian space technology.
- bluscale, on 08/04/2008, -0/+15It's the other way around.
- scratt, on 08/04/2008, -5/+20So let me get this straight..
The US pushed and shoved and unilaterally created an oppressive and unjust global law which caused most of the problems we see with Iran today, at the same time violating Iran's rights as a free nation. This law was based on typical US paranoia and self deception, as well as a healthy dose of self serving propaganda - which it blatantly then proceeded to use to further it's own unilateral aims at world manipulation.
The US then granted themselves a waiver to get around that law when it suited them..
Now they are moaning that the waiver that allows them to break a law they created which affects the whole world and they have never obeyed is going to expire and it's then going to be Iran's fault if the ISS is no longer serviceable...
The mind boggles. - ohearn, on 08/04/2008, -2/+15No but it is the fault of shortsighted lawmakers who don't know what they are doing.
- trer, on 08/04/2008, -0/+11A better question is: why aren't we developing the Yamato Cannon so that we can battle the Zerg?
- purelithium, on 08/04/2008, -0/+10Because it's well past it's original life-cycle limit, but since there were budget cutbacks in the '90s, NASA had to extend it because there were no funds to design and build a replacement. Now they have those funds.
- smurfsahoy, on 08/04/2008, -0/+10Um, change the legislation...? If this was an unintended consequence due to lack of clarity about what the law was meant to do, there should be little or no objection to tweaking it to make this not a problem. And we have 3 years to do this.
This is probably the most non-story news post I've seen hit Digg all week. - kahrn, on 08/04/2008, -7/+16Why is it Iran's fault for a US action? Do you not mean the fault of the bush administration?
- PhantomBantam, on 08/04/2008, -0/+9Pretty sure junkstuff was being sarcastic.
- Suzilla, on 08/04/2008, -1/+9It is useful if for no other reason than precisely the one you state: It is a laboratory for figuring out not just how to work in space, but how to work TOGETHER in space. The costs to build and operate the ISS, for us, pale in comparison to what Iraq is costing us. The disparity in value returned is far and away even greater. Stay in space -- leave Iraq.
- personalj, on 08/04/2008, -0/+8Buzz is going to lay the smack down on you.
- zombiecarlin, on 08/04/2008, -3/+10What would stop Russian and European rockets servicing the station until NASA gets its act together and replaces the shuttle?
- ihavebeenseen, on 08/04/2008, -0/+7bosssmiley, Buzz told me he was looking for you.
- tibe, on 08/04/2008, -0/+7NASA also have use of the ESA's Jules Verne which is man rated and has completed demo docking with the ISS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Verne_ATV - fuhcough, on 08/04/2008, -2/+8hahah that's hilarious. like the US follows its own laws... hahahahah
- zerocool1990, on 08/04/2008, -2/+8I highly doubt that a law would stop the US from doing anything they want to do.
- Mononuclear, on 08/04/2008, -1/+7Since when has the US decided not to do something because it was illegal? Since the beginning of the history of this country the US has never let laws stand in the way.
- purelithium, on 08/04/2008, -1/+6Why can't they just send their astronauts and equipment to Russia and pay them to blast it into space? Why do they have to "buy" the rockets. Just rent them.
- pintomp3, on 08/04/2008, -0/+5how is iran to blame for the laws we make?
- hexydes, on 08/04/2008, -0/+5@DesignNerd: Yeah, because administrators definitely need more money to squander upon themselves. If you think even 50 cents of every dollar you send to schools gets where it should be going, you're sadly mistaken.
Until the school system is fixed so that ALL of the money I give goes to students (and to an extent the educators, at least in the form of materials), then I don't think the schools need any more funding. That money would be much better off with NASA (not that they don't have their own horrible mismanagement, but not nearly as bad as public schools). - lmp49, on 08/04/2008, -0/+5no, iran is not going to help 'doom' (stupid word anyway) the space station. the policy makers who don't care about scientific research unless it wins them votes - those are the ones who are f*cking up future plans to travel to the station
then again, we should stop bitching and start doing something about it, like lobbying our congressmen and congresswomen - localzuk, on 08/04/2008, -1/+6Money. Look into how the station is funded. Most funding comes from the USA. As does most of the man power.
One of the ESA scientists gave an example in an interview, the first meeting that ESA specialists had with NASA had about 12 ESA people and 1200 NASA people. That's the kind of ratio we're talking about here. - JQP123, on 08/04/2008, -0/+5"Because neither the Russian launch vehicles nor the spacecraft are reusable."
The 1970's called. They want their propaganda back.
The space shuttle has proven time and again that by almost any practical measure, "reusable" is not a "good thing". The Soyuz may not be "reusable" but it can dock with the space station, deliver goods and return people to earth and do it all for a fraction of the cost of the space shuttle.
- ciaran036, on 08/04/2008, -0/+4More anti-Iran propaganda...
- WoollyMittens, on 08/04/2008, -0/+4America has already proven to break any international law or treaty when it suits them.
- Koppie, on 08/04/2008, -1/+5Why do we need to buy Soyuz rockets? Can't the Russians just fly them? With American astronauts on board? The way they do right now?
Story buried for inaccurate. - jpate86, on 08/04/2008, -1/+5We're the United States, when we no longer like the current rules...We do what we want.
- NJank, on 08/04/2008, -0/+4and for once I agree with you. In this situation that actually is a better question.
- bosssmiley, on 08/04/2008, -7/+11They did.
...
What, you never saw "Capricorn One"? ;-) - MaxIsBored, on 08/04/2008, -1/+5Yes, blame Iran..
- WELLDOITLIVE, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3"Kernel"
- MrPig, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Although that wouldn't fix the lifeboat problem... unless we kept a shuttle there at all times.
- chanop, on 08/04/2008, -1/+4Until Obama gets into office. He wants to drastically cut NASA funds to put into education. Although I agree we need more help in schools, I wish it didn't have to be taken away from NASA
- gasoline, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3So, who wants to go on a four-year mission in space to boldly go where, well, some astronauts have gone before?
- enderklein, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Because it's not human rated. I suppose they could modify it to be, but I think the big problem is the crew capsule not the rocket.
- HotSaucePanCake, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Something tells me the old birds will still fly
- strictnein, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3This is clearly the first time in the history of the world for a law to have unintended consequences.
- schrutefan, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3US will just break the law. What's the problem?
- fracktica, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Of course, only after accompanying them with a science vessel or two to EMP shockwave the bastards. : )
- JQP123, on 08/04/2008, -1/+4"Can someone answer why the space shuttle is being retired?"
Because it has proven to be the most expensive, least cost effective way ever devised to put a payload into low earth orbit. And because it has already served it's primary purpose --- funneling billions in unnecessary spending to the military/industrial complex. It's now time to shift the corporate welfare shell game to some new project just to keep the public off balance. - kokodhem, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Why are you blaming Iran, idiot article author? It's US law, not Iran's fault...
- superrandomguy, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3because everyone knows you save your yamato cannon for when the protoss come blazing in with 30 carriers!
:-) - gweedo767, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3Nothing, Russia is gonna make a ton of money off us having to send people to ISS and paying them to do it (no need to import anything when we just fly our astronauts over there).
- gweedo767, on 08/04/2008, -0/+3SpaceX doesn't have a license form NASA to send people to space, only cargo.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 119 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is