Wanderers - a short film by Erik Wernquist

Started by Kadri, November 30, 2014, 05:54:17 am

Previous topic - Next topic

AP

If we take a market-based private approach to space exploration then the technology will advance faster, it will become more affordable to get there and competition will allow the best and brightest to accomplish a fraction of what the Government is capable of doing. I would rather be exploring and mining space rather then having the other group wasting time and money over seas blowing people up in useless wars. You have to get the Government out of the way or there will always be roadblocks and things will be slow. We do not need a NASA, we need competing privately funded companies to strive to be the best and move forward into the unknown.

archonforest

Yep. This is already started with project MARS ONE :)
Dell T5500 with Dual Hexa Xeon CPU 3Ghz, 32Gb ram, GTX 1080
Amiga 1200 8Mb ram, 8Gb ssd

Oshyan

I think we need both. Private companies have little or no interest in research that does not have obvious product and profit goals and motives, yet such research has contributed tremendously to our lives. NASA needs more funding, and space needs to also be commercialized.

- Oshyan

archonforest

Quote from: Oshyan on December 02, 2014, 04:03:50 pm
and space needs to also be commercialized.

- Oshyan

:D :D Just imagine that little green alien who passing by and sees out floating latest "catfood" advertisement....lol!
Dell T5500 with Dual Hexa Xeon CPU 3Ghz, 32Gb ram, GTX 1080
Amiga 1200 8Mb ram, 8Gb ssd

AP

I think NASA at this point seems doomed. A slow death. I lost faith in them a long ago. I think we need to go in a different direction. Try something new or continue the same direction as it has been the last decades which I think is insane. It has not worked well. I think if anything NASA should be funded through the private sector and become privatized itself. If we had less Government in the first place, the money would be there and it would be more effective for what needs to be done.

otakar

Oshyan what I meant is that the leaps in computing and AI will 'soon' enable robots to act, solve complex problems and adapt so that the gap between human capabilities and those of robots shrinks enough that it will be the preferred way to explore and 'colonize'. Which will be much sooner than coming up with ways to sustain humans for years and decades in deep space and hostile environments on other worlds. It's just my thinking, I may be way off.

Oshyan

How long have we been working on AI and improving robots? And yet they still can't even match, much less beat, humans at almost anything. Boston Dynamics gives some hope, but AI is still far behind. I don't have any confidence that investing in robotics and AI will yield results any faster than investing in life support, colonization, and human space travel technology. And let's not forget that *inspiration* is also a big part of getting people to support and invest in space travel of any kind. Having humans in the equation is far more inspiring than robots.

As for the NASA issue, well I could rant on for ages about what's gone wrong there, but I'll keep it short. NASA's problems are political, not organizational, technical, or functional. Congress and various presidents have all but forced NASA to be ineffectual and make bad choices through various budget decisions, mandates, no-or-minimal-bid contracts, and more. Remove those handcuffs and NASA would be great again.

And commercial space flight, well the only 2 non-military commercial space companies that have had any success are founded and funded by billionaire entrepreneurs with a personal investment and interest in space travel. These companies are not being created and operated on purely commercial terms, the money just isn't there yet. These companies exist because smart, wealthy people recognize the value of space travel, not just in economic terms, but in social, psychological, and philosophical terms. If nothing else they are inspired by what's out there, and that's what Wanderers does, and it's part of the role that NASA could play, if it had budget and freedom to make decisions and act on them long-term without redirection and meddling.

- Oshyan

AP

I can see where robots in terms of automation come in handy. That is growing every year. As far as anything else. I can not see robots doing anything more then being used for helping tasks.

Political, exactly which is why NASA should become privately funded and operated. The Government does not have a reason to be accountable, nor responsible to NASA and I see no confidence in that area. Simply put if we had less Government, guess what... more money to flow into the areas where the money could go. I bet if Government was reduced in size greatly then we could have more companies investing in space travel and more entrepreneurs. Government prevents that from happening through countless regulations, thousands of laws and high taxes in many areas. No one can afford to do anything.


TheBadger

December 02, 2014, 11:02:22 pm #23 Last Edit: December 02, 2014, 11:11:33 pm by TheBadger
I agree that it has to be both. In the system that we have the only thing that works is pitting the various interests against one another, private v public, under some unifying principals and laws.

I don't trust industry to do anything in a way that is safe, without over sight. And I don't trust government to be responsible with most anything involving money.

I feel like NASA is probably very careful with the funds that it does have, due to the fact that they must be. As apposed to DOD, for example. But of course the most obvious waster of cash is the congress and the white house.

Definitely trust NASA over the Congress and the White House.
It has been eaten.