What is Digg?Sponsored by openforum.com
The Art of the List -- Guy Kawasaki view!
openforum.com - A post that contains an ordered or bulleted list is probably much better conceived and organized.
94 Comments
- djSyndrome, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28Will we have correct usage of capital letters in 20 years?
- hambend, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23At some point, if we're really serious about surviving as a species, we're going to want to put societies on other planets, preferably in other solar systems. That means building massive arks, with fully contained and sustainable ecosystems (or just some kind of stasis facility), capable of holding people by their hundreds of thousands and with engines that can take them all the way across space with basically no room for error. AND, we need to know what we're going to do when we get there.
NASA thought they might start out with a moon base, which is a bit easier. Seems reasonable to me. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23The Hubble Telescope had a mirror that was 1/1000th of a millimeter off, and it didn't work because of that. Come on
- ddroth88, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20I thought we got some pretty amazing science out of the hubble telescope even if it was "broken".
- sockpuppets, on 10/12/2007, -9/+25Am I the only one that saw this as Wii ?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17LOLKEEKLEWAFFLEBERRYSKATES!!
- xerus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17We are... we're just making the moon a pit stop. Maybe we'll open up a McDonalds or something there. Grab a Big Mac(tm), then head off to mars for some Aquifina Bottled Mars Water (c) (tm)
- jammink, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The cheese mines alone will generate huge income for the US.
- clayfootj, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16I think it was the moon not mars
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I Cannot Answer That At The Moment, Sorry.
- dsignr, on 10/12/2007, -10/+22All your [moon] base are belong to us
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14Cool. I'm ready to leave this planet...the sooner the better.
- primehifi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13"I don't see what the point would be to put a base on the moon "
in referencing a previously dugg story about humans exploding in space, the obvious reasons to put a base or bases on the moon would be so that we could run from base to base naked............... i thought it was obvious. *shrugs* - b7j0c, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6no, what we will have in twenty years are the fond memories of paying lockheed and boeing $10 billion to do "planning", followed by the $25 billion we paid for "concept", followed by the $30 billion for a 1:20 scale "mockup", after which Congress will take this pork project out back and put a slug in it.
these projects are not intended to "work", no more than missle defense or scramjets. they are designed for one purpose - redirect funds to defense contractors. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Will we Have Correct Sentence Punctuation in 20 Years
- sixister, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Didn't they say the exact same thing in 1960?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I will be fully dependent on moonohol.
- pegothejerk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Can moonijuana be far behind?
- rocketryguy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6The old "spend the money on social ills" is both fallacious and counterproductive. It's like saying lets spend money on groceries instead of rent. We need to do both, and frankly, the "billions" spent on all space programs is an insignificant part of the budget If it all stopped tomorrow, you'd never notice the difference(until technological stagnation set in). Much of it goes into science and research, which directly benefits us, just not in ways that you're concious of.
The actual mis-appropriation is through the military. We're overspending insanely, and the troops have no freaking armor, or have to buy their own. It's corrupt and leads us into lovely things like oil wars. So if you want to actually solve social funding issues, take 1/10th of what is being spent to kill people, and you're done.
That said I'm not the biggest fan of NASA. I agree that they've been horrifically wasteful at times. Basically some of the programs are good, some are bad, and too much of the outcomes are dictated not by reason or common sense, but politics and money. It has been treated like a pork project, instead of a vital part of national vitality, and frankly, human vitality. It's a globally important thing. - blahblah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5The bill your great-grandchildren will be paying will be 1 part NASA, 1000 parts Iraq.
- JeffH, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5And the savings lie in not having to abort missions halfway through when we realize there's no fuel left. Right now there's not a manned ship in NASA's fleet that can make it to Mars. They lose most of their gas getting off of Earth. If we could get a full tank when we are out of Earth's atmosphere, we're gold.
- zonk3r, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6I'm all for it but umm... who's paying for it? My guess is my great-grandchildren will be...
- im12env, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4We are... we're just making the moon a pit stop. Maybe we'll open up a McDonalds or something there. Grab a Big Mac(tm), then head off to mars for some Aquifina Bottled Mars Water (c) (tm)
Or Some Mars Bars..... lol - Manhigh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Title is misleading. NASA would like one, weather it happens is up to congress (i.e. the American voters)
Putting a research station on the Moon is good for a number of reasons...
... Since its built on the moon, as opposed to an orbiting station, it can be mothballed if budget dictates that we can't send sorties to it for a few years.
... Theres at least some gravity, so body deterioration isnt as severe.
... The moon would be a great place for telescopes
...Its cheaper than Mars, and politically thats HUGE. If we can develop a lot of the technology we need for Mars there, we stand a much better chance of getting to Mars soon. Otherwise congress will balk at the pricetag of going to Mars.
However, I disagree that the Moon is a good place from which to send Mars missions, UNLESS we can make rocket propellant from the natural resources there. It just doesn't make any sense to send rocket parts and propellant into orbit, boost them to the moon, slow them down to land on the moon, put them together, and launch them from the moon to Mars.
/NASA engineer
/Opinions expressed here are my own and not necessarily offical positions of my employer - mandarin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Whats a British Cracker?
It's not 20 years yet so its possible. - seeprompt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4its about time if you ask me....when did we land on the moon? 50 years ago????
- terrya64, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It's about time we go to the moon
- Sakumi, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Conspiracy theorists make me laugh (such as you).
Telescopes on Earth can see the stuff left behind from the Apollo missions. It's not exactly very far *wink* - rocketryguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm thinking that one would assemble parts in either earth or lunar orbit, not de-orbit onto the lunar surface.
Getting materials, such as aluminum or oxygen from lunar regolith, refining/manufacturing on the lunar surface and then chucking it up to lunar orbit is both feasible and sensible from a boost cost perspective. Mass drivers are incredibly easy to build there. A 100HP electric motor powered by solar energy could literally fling a payload (dammit, I can't remember what the mass was, it was significant though) with enough force to attain escape velocity.
Sort of an electric trebuchet, it would allow for very cheap mass lifting out of the lesser gravity well, and drop the overall cost dramatically. Even with the complexity of assemblage in orbit, if it were a standardized procedure and we had less mass sensitivity, we'd be way ahead.
The difficulty will be dealing with the physical challenges of the moon environment, and turning the extremes into advantages efficiently. But even there, we are more than technologically capable of doing the job, it's only a question of will. Which in turn is a question of education. The general public doesn't generally understand how crucial space exploration is, nor what an incredible potential benefit it is to us.
In a way, Apollo really screwed things up, because it tainted exploration with a huge price tag, which isn't necessary when done rationally. But, that said, I often wish I could have seen a Saturn V go up. I've seen the Shuttle, and it's not the same, from what I've pieced together. I'm looking forward to a day where transportation options include exo-atmospheric flight, as just another option. - EochaidRiata, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Have we forgotten about the trouble our own Continent is in? (Constant wars for one) Or should we fund the money to stuff that isn't needed? Geez...let's save Europe before we inhabit other continents."
-- Queen Isabella - mogus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm usually not the greenpeace type, but It seems like the technological challenges that confront us as we try to live effectively on this planet are a whole lot easier to deal with than those of living on Mars or the Moon. The only those two places have over this third rock is vast amounts of open space. I'd say that we could find that in Africa or Northern Canada. Also, at what point do we get a group of people fighting to preserve the pristine nature of the Moon and Mars? Talk about unspoiled territory. Forget ANWR, you have a solar system to save!
- gamerzworld, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4F!ck the moon base plan! I wanna Mars base!!
- rysolag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2you're a ***** retard willy.
- trejrco, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4For great justice!
- NinjaBoy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I wonder how long it will take to turn the moon into a giant billboard?
- Kyderdog, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6>>The gravitational pull of the moon (and lack of atmosphere) is nothing compared to Earth
Funny thing is you still have to get the hardware to the moon.....wheres the savings? - JasonPrini, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2the "Free Market" is a lie, similar to the Communist lie.
It does not exist, it has never existed, and it will never exist.
Noam Chomski said it best: "... the driving force of modern industrial civilization has been individual material gain. Which has been accepted as legitimate, even praiseworthy on the grounds that private vices yield public benefits, in the classic formulation. Now it’s been long been understood, very well, that a society that is based on this principle will destroy itself in time. ..." - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSxYEzSpFdc&eurl= - brianez21, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Is it really for great justice to nuke countries from orbit?
- Kyderdog, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7WATER ON MARS!!!??? who cares about the moon....
WE should be moving towards Mars. - tektalk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I'm gonna bring a trampoline to the moon.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Sakumi
You write: "Telescopes on Earth can see the stuff left behind from the Apollo missions. It's not exactly very far" *wink*
Then prove it. Show me, Sakumi, I want to believe. A link, Google Search?
Landing and returning Men from the Moon would be the most mind blowing scientific achievement of mankind, so it should be well documented for all of posterity. Show me pictures of the current surface of the Moon with the items that were left behind by humanity, they should be as common as glossy magazines.
*winks back* - mogus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Would you rather be the top scientist in your field, or have mad cow disease?
- MatTipton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2When this happens I'm totally going to get all metal teeth and become an astronaut.
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"The future of space travel should be the FREE MARKET!"
This neocommunist free market ideology crap is starting to piss me off even more than the little red book of mao. - TheZorch, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1A moon base to launch future missions to Mars and the other outer planets makes a lot of sense. Also, an obervatory and a massive array of radio telescopes could be built on the far side of the moon.
- blahblah, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2They did, and they had the technology in 1960. If only they hadn't cut funding... stupid government.
- hiscity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The moon is the best near-earth long-term deep-freeze with near cryogenic temperatures -- that takes little or no energy to maintain the chill -- in the right locations.
That's reason enough to start up trade routes with the moon.
Best not leave it up to NASA, ESA, or any other bureaucracy though or it will take 20 years instead of 5. All government needs to do is keep a land office to register deed claims and provide a patrol to enforce ownership rights. Thar's gold in them thar hills! (close enough)
The alternative is to harvest organs from brain dead diggers. Best I can tell there's no lack of supply. - spottrack7, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Preparing the ground for Mars? Not for Humans' glory, but for new mines and more money. The research can wait, money wasters cannot.
- hiscity, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2chomsky is in bed with the proutists, which is like a pseudo-religious socialism
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prout+chomsky
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROUT (progressive utilization theory)
also chavez... mebe also his buddy, the late fidel c.
1) No individual should be allowed to accumulate any physical wealth without the clear permission or approval of the collective body.
2) There should be maximum utilization and rational distribution of all mundane, supra-mundane, and spiritual potentialities of the universe.
3) There should be maximum utilization of the physical, metaphysical, and spiritual potentialities of the unit and collective bodies of human society.
4) There should be a proper adjustment amongst these physical, metaphysical, mundane, supramundane and spiritual utilizations.
5) The method of utilization should vary in accordance with the changes in time, place, and person, and the utilization should be of a progressive nature. - MSTK, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1^^
She actually waited until taking Granada and bringing Spain into (relative) peace before she looked at Columbus's proposal that had been lying on her desk for a couple of years. -
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
