Forum menu
Maybe in the future, in hundreds of years time our decedents will look back at Musk and his pals and be grateful for what they did.
unless they are on mars in a couple of hundred years any humans on earth will be scratching a subsistence living given what runaway climate change is expected to do to the planet. I doubt they will have time or knowledge to know what Musk did
Think you’re getting confused with that peculiar American libertarian version
Nope the fact that money is quantitative rather then qualitative is straight out of anarcho-communism handbooks of the Italians like Cafiero and Covelli. They wanted the collective ownership of production but were content for each individual to gain personally from that ownership, it's pretty orthodox anarchism. edit The only 'rule' is that wealth in of itself shouldn't have societal value placed on it.
and I'll ask again; why are you opposed to individuals exploring the Cosmos?
no different to Pharoahs building pyramids.
(Again) assuming that to be true,
So what? What's wrong with the pyramids?
How is extreme capitalism not an inevitable consequence of anarchy?
dazh
Full MemberNot snide, just stupid. Even in an MMT based system money is not infinite. Think you probably know that though.
I also know that it wouldn't need infinite money to do this, it's a drop in the bucket. Think you probably know that though.
And we are still impressed by them today.
I’d say we’re more curious and mystified as to the folly of an entire civilisation being mobilised to build monuments to leaders who subjugated and enslaved the population. The main difference between then and now is that the impact of the pyramids were relatively benign compared to the results of oligarchic capitalism in the form of billionaire penis extensions in space.
why are you opposed to individuals exploring the Cosmos?
I’ve already said (a couple of times) that I’m not as long as it’s sustainable. Currently it’s not.
How is it not?
Environmentally it could easily be offset by stopping frivolous leisure activities.
Economically it's almost not worth mentioning.
You just don't like it because you're too myopic to see the point. TBH I'm not sure how any of us are going to convince you otherwise.
How is it not?
I’ve already explained. But once again, the embodied carbon emissions of the financial empires of the billionaires pursuing private space travel make it completely unsustainable. When they can make their money sustainably, then I’ll have no problem with it.
If anuone has any good documentary suggests on the current programmes feel free to post.
Got some lingering virus thats giving me grief and need some TV interest.
I’d say we’re more curious and mystified as to the folly of an entire civilisation being mobilised to build monuments to leaders who subjugated and enslaved the population. The main difference between then and now is that the impact of the pyramids were relatively benign compared to the results of oligarchic capitalism in the form of billionaire penis extensions in space.
It's a myth that the pyramids were built by slaves, it's believed today that they were paid labourers. It was likely considered an honour to work on them. As I understand it (and I'm no expert here) Ancient Egyptian slavery was more like bonded labour, it was often to pay off debts rather than enforced subjugation.
You seem remarkably fixated on phallic objects, you've brought it up multiple times now. I'm not sure that's healthy.
It’s a myth that the pyramids were built by slaves
I'm not sure I said that? I said a civilisation was "mobilised". Some will have been slaves, others not. Although depends on how you define 'enslaved'. If you have to work in order to survive, often in jobs you wouldn't choose to do otherwise, are you a slave? How many of the people working for Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos would fit that description? Quite a lot I would think.
You seem remarkably fixated on phallic objects
I'm fixated on pointing it out, because ultimately all this is a product of men trying to prove their virility and masculinity, and surprisingly not many people too bothered about a few men destroying the planet in the process.
Huh, interesting read here.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-egypt-s-great-pyramid-changed-civilization/
But his pyramid project, unprecedented in its scope, drove the development of these infrastructures to dizzying new heights and in so doing primed Egypt to flourish in the centuries to come.
Good old dose of science and engineering set them up well
Far from being treated little better than slaves, Merrer's crew and the rest of Heit el-Ghurab's estimated 6,000 residents appear to have lived quite comfortably. The findings suggest that after a long day's work of unloading the barges, the pyramid builders would have headed into town to eat. The smell of baking bread and brewing beer would have wafted from the bakeries a few hundred feet away, advertising what was on the menu.
Doesnt seem to bad a gig for the trades, maybe we should have built a Pyramid instead of HS2.
Interesting program on this eve(13/4) with Brian Cox on a week with the Mars rover. Should be interesting. Exclusive NASA stuff.
He says,trying to steer the thread away from Elon Musk or phallic shaped objects.
Anyway, off topic, back to penis rockets. I’ve still not seen a single justification beyond a liking for shiny gadgets, cool tech and the cult of personality around billionaires like Musk. As I said, it’s no different to Pharoahs building pyramids.
Then you’ve not looked at anything I’ve written or half the stuff posted in this thread never mind what’s on NASA’s strategic goals from 2010-2030, what’s been accomplished and how it’s now used.
I’m fixated on pointing it out, because ultimately all this is a product of men trying to prove their virility and masculinity, and surprisingly not many people too bothered about a few men destroying the planet in the process.
If that’s your take on it, then you’re an idiot with an edifice complex.
They’re not in this for willy waving, they’re in this to make more money. They’re venture capitalists, but with more reserves than most and the ability to keep it to themselves.
Do I agree with the goal? No. But I can’t argue with the results, nor the acceleration of technology development, and it’s there, evident for all to see. Bezos pioneered self landing rockets, though bizzarly, must gets the credit. That capability, coupled with the falcon programmes reusability has dropped by almost 90%, the costs to make an LEO launch.
LEO launches at this price point forced EVERYONE in the launcher business to adapt. Space based solar power, satellite constellations, lunar mining are all now possible due to this reduction.
Tesla’s effect is self evident. With it, there would be no EV revolution. Period.
You need to stop projecting your beliefs on to others actions.
I’m not sure I said that? I said a civilisation was “mobilised”. Some will have been slaves, others not. Although depends on how you define ‘enslaved’. If you have to work in order to survive, often in jobs you wouldn’t choose to do otherwise, are you a slave? How many of the people working for Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos would fit that description? Quite a lot I would think.
This is right up there with the dumbest things you’ve said and that’s saying something. Slaves would be worked to death and killed if they tried to quit. No one working for Tesla, SpaceX, Blue Origin or Amazon faces the same or even remotely close.
Are they dicks to the people that work for them? Often, yes. Should governments do something about it? Yes.
The interview with Musk showed how technically focussed he is, people problems don’t register as he can’t relate. That’s a failure and one which should be protected against, but it’s not. Not fully, anyway
Apollo mobilised a nation to achieve something. Nothing else i. The history of mankind has achieved so much outside of a war time environment and even then it’s arguable if there’s a better example
Oh, and just for the sake of it, Musks wealth isn’t claimed by milking the little people*, his wealth comes from the stock price of a brand he built. People believe in it and him and pay a premium to invest and perpetuate it.
*I admit, I wouldn’t want to work for him, but have worked in F1 and it’s not a lot different. Employers expect a LOT and if you aren’t interested in giving it in times of need, others will.
Nothing else i. The history of mankind has achieved so much outside of a war time environment and even then it’s arguable if there’s a better example
OH thats a bit sweeping. How about modern medicine? Industrial revolution?
I
Just watched the Brian Cox Mars program on BBC2
It was very interesting and worth looking for on iPlayer
his wealth comes from the stock price of a brand he built. People believe in it and him and pay a premium to invest and perpetuate it.
So what you're saying is that even if Daz was in charge he'd still be wealthy because other people think so?
I’m not sure I said that? I said a civilisation was “mobilised”. Some will have been slaves, others not. Although depends on how you define ‘enslaved’. If you have to work in order to survive, often in jobs you wouldn’t choose to do otherwise, are you a slave? How many of the people working for Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos would fit that description? Quite a lot I would think.
Perhaps not.
But at the risk of feeding into your Poundland brand of pseudo-anarchy, by that definition we're all slaves. I work to survive. Don't you?
There are *wild* differences between the Ancient Egyptian slaves of some four or five thousand years ago, the subjugated chattel slavery of the US a couple of hundred years ago, and modern day wage slavery.
I’m fixated on pointing it out, because ultimately all this is a product of men trying to prove their virility and masculinity, and surprisingly not many people too bothered about a few men destroying the planet in the process.
Do you suppose that Musk went to his rocket engineers with a double-Polaroid of his cock and went "build this"? Rockets tend to be long and pointy, it's something of a defining feature.
OH thats a bit sweeping. How about modern medicine? Industrial revolution?
Name a single competing endevour.
Name one thing, that in a small timeframe has delivered so much science and engineering that it completely altered not just it’s own sector, but dozens/hundreds of adjacent ones.
The pandemic and vaccine development is the closest, but it didn’t revolutionise anything. The techniques were already established.
Do you suppose that Musk went to his rocket engineers with a double-Polaroid of his cock and went “build this”? Rockets tend to be long and pointy, it’s something of a defining feature.
Its Jeffs double Polaroid penis, not Elons.
Its seemingly a good idea as well, not that it looks like a double Polaroid, but from a functional perspective. Im sure you're already aware, any idea its in any way anything other than an unfortunate coincidence image wise is obviously somewhat idiotic.
Jeff may have some genuinely off putting/harmful business practices, but I dont think hes trying to live out Flesh Gordon's spaceship as a reality.
Name one thing, that in a small timeframe has delivered so much science and engineering that it completely altered not just it’s own sector, but dozens/hundreds of adjacent ones.
Im not 100% on what timeframe your working to there? The Industrial Revolution took place over a lazily googled time frame of around 60-80 years.
The Space Race started in 1955(?), so in the same time bracket.
Interesting program on this eve(13/4) with Brian Cox on a week with the Mars rover. Should be interesting. Exclusive NASA stuff.
Cheers @dynati and @daffy too
I'd go with the internet Daffy, would you concede that?
I’d go with the internet Daffy, would you concede that?
Yes. But again, the computing technologies, the networking and the communications protocols were all developed from Apollo. UCLA and SRI were directly funded by NASA to investigate computer to computer communication to aid in CM>LM communication from 63-72. In the end, it wasn't ready by 1965 and so more conventional means were used, it wasn't until 69 that it was tested and still wasn't ready by 72 when Apollo ended.
Again, the rapid rollout of the internet was enabled by the development of fibre-optics by STC (nothing to do with NASA) and Lasers which were developed by Hughes under contract to the DoD Space programme which was all transferred to NASA upon it's formation in 58.
The Space Race started in 1955(?), so in the same time bracket.
I'd say the space race started in 52 and ended in 73 when NASA had it's budget slashed, the super heavy sea based launchers (Dragon) were cancelled and the Spacebase was dramitically reduced in size to just re-use what was left from Apollo. Without these, MARS was no longer an option. The shuttle was built instead to service the DoD requirements for surveillance satellites.
Direct quote from Wiki:
Legacy
Science and engineering
Further information: NASA spin-off technologies
The Apollo program has been described as the greatest technological achievement in human history.[149] Apollo stimulated many areas of technology, leading to over 1,800 spinoff products as of 2015, including advances in the development of cordless power tools, fireproof materials, heart monitors, solar panels, digital imaging, and the use of liquid methane as fuel.[150][151][152] The flight computer design used in both the lunar and command modules was, along with the Polaris and Minuteman missile systems, the driving force behind early research into integrated circuits (ICs). By 1963, Apollo was using 60 percent of the United States' production of ICs. The crucial difference between the requirements of Apollo and the missile programs was Apollo's much greater need for reliability. While the Navy and Air Force could work around reliability problems by deploying more missiles, the political and financial cost of failure of an Apollo mission was unacceptably high.[153]Technologies and techniques required for Apollo were developed by Project Gemini.[154] The Apollo project was enabled by NASA's adoption of new advances in semiconductor electronic technology, including metal–oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) in the Interplanetary Monitoring Platform (IMP)[155][156] and silicon integrated circuit chips in the Apollo Guidance Computer (AGC).[157]
Consider - almost all of the ideas that Musk is using for Space X - Self landing rockets, Supper Heavy LVs, Re-usable space planes, are from patents filed by NASA in the 60s/70s. The advantage Musk has is better computers and materials science, also helped by NASA.
Also consider, the cryogenic technologies and fuel cells developed for the CSM are being revisited today for for Hydrogen powered aircraft. They're the design startpoint. Highly capable, highly redundant, highly reliable, lightweight fuelcells and cryogenics designed around crew safety.
Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Apollo Applications cost $25bn in total in 60s 70s money. So around $300bn today. Over 20 years, so €15bn a year. A bargain if you ask me.
Name one thing, that in a small timeframe has delivered so much science and engineering that it completely altered not just it’s own sector, but dozens/hundreds of adjacent ones.
invention of the steamengine. revolutionized the entire world.
Its good point - but of course the space race of the 60s was at least partly in response to the "cold war" so not really a peacetime thing. I would say in reality its the same rapid technological advance as you see in wartime for much the same reasons
I’d say the space race started in 52 and ended in 73 when NASA had it’s budget slashed
I was really thinking of manned spaceflight using the start point of the Space Race but continuing with the ongoing manned spaceflight.
I think it's a bit foolish to credit the space race with all these things. It developed and incubated a lot of stuff but they were also developed elsewhere as well. The modern I ternet didn't fall fully formed from a NASA programme. Lasers may have been developed by NASA at some point but like most things they were the result of theoretical work and ideas from loads of people and were developed for many years all over the place. Modern fibre optics use solid state lasers that I don't think were invented by NASA.
For far reaching innovations I'd nominate the transistor and the microprocessor, neither of which were invented by NASA.
Thats not to say I don't think space programmes have value. I think they are a way for governments to incubate technological and engineering skills within a country. The people who work there develop skills that can be used elsewhere in other areas of science and engineering. The main question is no wether or not there are better ways to perform this role. Maybe, but clearly NASA is inspiring people to become engineers and scientists so that has some value on its own.
If that’s your take on it, then you’re an idiot with an edifice complex.
This is right up there with the dumbest things you’ve said
Daffy you're being needlessly confrontational. I'm asking fairly relevant and sensible questions about whether billionaires having private space programmes is a good idea or not. And your response is that I'm thick. Sorry to puncture your tech utopia bubble.
Apollo mobilised a nation to achieve something. Nothing else i. The history of mankind has achieved so much outside of a war time environment and even then it’s arguable if there’s a better example
I don't really have a problem with Apollo, although most of the stuff it accelerated would have been invented anyway, and most of it (ie computers) was already in train. Apollo was undoubtedly impressive from a technological point of view, and it happened at a time when the US government still gave a shit about the prosperity of working people. It's an excellent/the best example of space exploration done very well in the interests of everyone.
but have worked in F1 and it’s not a lot different.
F1 is even more pointless than private space programmes. I can see now why you're so defensive. 🙂
I’d go with the internet Daffy, would you concede that?
The internet is a wonderful resource, and speaking as a full stack developer it's paid my wages for 25 years, but can we really say it is beneficial? I look at my kids with their heads buried in their phones all day looking at pictures of beautiful people on instagram and I really wonder whether the negatives outweight the positives. 🤷♂️
can we really say it is beneficial? I look at my kids with their heads buried in their phones all day looking at pictures of beautiful people on instagram and I really wonder whether the negatives outweight the positives.
That's a small part of what the internet enables as I'm sure you know. That's like saying trains are bad because you can go to Blackpool on one.
So why Mars? was the original question.
I have a genuine question: Are we looking at a race to control territory and potential mineral resources?
Are there any binding agreements covering ownership of the above on extra terrestrial bodies or is it Klondike Mk2?
F1 is even more pointless than private space programmes. I can see now why you’re so defensive
Dazh - it takes two to tango. I have enjoyed Daffys comments despite the assertive tone because they are informative and shows a viewpoint alien to me
That’s a small part of what the internet enables as I’m sure you know.
Yeah the rest of it is porn and gambling sites.
That’s a small part of what the internet enables as I’m sure you know.
The internet is what you make of it. For me its been hugely beneficial from buying bike bits to an easy way to keep in touch with folk to some sanity saving advice
Flippancy aside, TJ is bang on here. Dismissing the Internet as a whole (on the Internet, ironically) is as weird as saying that films are mostly porn. It's not all that long ago that we were burning books.
The medium isn't the problem. It's people that's the problem.
Free access to nearly all human knowledge, instant communication across the globe, cataloging and automation; all on a scale that would be unthinkable to the average person in the 90s. The internet and things relating to it/resulting from it is the greatest thing to have been invented come to practical inception in my life time.
Man stepping on Mars won't top that in my opinion. Man colonising Mars will.
I guess I’m biased on the internet issue as a result of a good friend of mine’s 13 year old daughter being in the full grip of social media based groomers who pretend to be her friend. She’s sent them naked pictures of herself and now they’ve threatened to publish them in case they send more. The police are involved, and she’s tried to commit suicide at least once in response to having her internet access taken away. It’s a full-on addiction no different to smack or crack.
although most of the stuff it accelerated would have been invented anyway, and most of it (ie computers) was already in train.
A computer was being built in the 1800’s, around 1830-ish, Charles Babbage’ Analytical Engine. It was to be a general purpose, fully programme-controlled automatic mechanical digital computer. It’s store, where data was held prior to processing, was to be large enough to hold 1000 50-digit numbers. Input was via punched cards, to follow a programme to calculate Bernoulli numbers, with an ability to execute instructions in other than sequential order, with decision making ability in its conditional control transfer, or conditional branching.
The programming system was being developed by Lady Ada Lovelace, nee Augusta Ada Byron, Lady Byron. Sadly, she died aged 36; who knows what she could have gone on to achieve.
Its not always Wars and "countries mobilised" driving things ahead either.
Meet LEO, the (British) computer funded by (British) cake...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/stories-50559357
Super short sub 4min video if youve not heard of LEO before, full documentary below.
That's not the best example... LEO and EDSAC were inspired by ENIAC which was developed for wartime by the US army. And much of the inspiration and underpinnings came out of wartime computer developments and subsequently the moore school lectures (more on this in a mo). ww2 was a titanic booster for programmable/reconfigurable computers, turing machines etc. Not much of it was really novel but it couldn't have happened the same way without the war- the funding alone made a huge difference but so did the concentration of minds.
Though, of course it's hard to say exactly what influenced what- UK computing was of course massively set back by the post-war secrecy and suppression of ideas, so while it's almost certain that Bletchley work directly impacted EDSAC, a lot of that was actually illegal and so was done very carefully and discretely or deniably, and not talked of or published. Or it happened by illogical routes- like, there were people at the moore lectures who were there to "learn" things they already knew, because they weren't allowed to discuss or use their work at Bletchley, but if they were told the same things in the US by someone who was allowed to talk about it, then they could talk anout it. Similar with von neumann and turing.
So it's complicated! But you can't separate LEO or anything that followed it from the wartime computing accelerando.
I dont think you can really separate the development of very much at all from preceding ideas/stuff. Theres always some previous capability underpinning progress. Id not want to get to reductive on that, as that way lie madness.
What LEO did, in my view, that was important, was to place that development into a commercial private sector environment 'for profit making' that would go on to be revolutionised.
That said, Im not that familiar with EDSAC, wasn't that a mostly research based venture?
LEO I was a direct improvement on EDSAC (Lyons funded EDSAC but I think only once it had reached the point of nearing completion?) no LEO without EDSAC, no EDSAC without ENIAC.
I mean, yes you're right that most things build on top of others but the wartime, war-led development of computers was absolutely transformative, to the point that we just can't make a smart guess about when we might have reached the same point without it, or even if we'd have reached the same point or gone divergent. But LEO I just simply couldn't have happened as it did without ww2.