Author Topic: The price for space (Read 1166 times)

Rockstar · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2003, 11:45:35 AM »

Quote

The last thing we need is two super-powers trying to achieve the same thing, but independently. It would be a complete waste of effort and resources.

Don't forget to say hello to chairman Mao when you pack-up and head out for China to spread the 'world according to dowding doctrine.'

Btw how many chinese websites are you hitting promoting your opinions of what super powers should do? Or is AH your only soap box?

Frogm4n · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2003, 11:48:14 AM »

if the government wants to have a co-op thing going they should partner up with japan way before anyone else.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2003, 12:00:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Frogm4n
if the government wants to have a co-op thing going they should partner up with japan way before anyone else.

Japan is lagging behind in the space sector. Joint Ventures are beneficial with Russia and Europe, since Russia has the know-how in energy generation and human sciences in space, and Europe has right now the most powerful and reliable launcher available.

There have been talks between NASA and ESA in order to have Ariane carry parts of the ISS to orbit.

The problem is that budget is laughable... even with the cuts, the European Space Agency has 1/6th of NASA's budget, and Russia... well they are looking for more tourists.

I guess space is for idealists... until we find oil under the surface of Mars or something.

Daniel

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2003, 12:04:16 PM »

hey miko

in american the goverment employees cant be taken out and shot on a whim by anyone.

you will find this makes a huge difference in creativity.

midnight Target · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2003, 12:11:01 PM »

Quote

Oh, yes - we all know that the government is the best source for new ideas and research. Look how much advancements they have in Russia and North Korea!

Big difference here miko, is that while most research may be State funded either directly or indirectly, but it is still done mostly by the private sector.

miko2d · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2003, 12:47:19 PM »

AKIron: Nowhere did I indicate that only government should be allowed to pioneer space travel. In fact, commercial industry does participate both in cooperation with the government and on their own. It isn't like the US government is suppressing inovation by controlling and repressing private industry in this area.

There is quite a lot of literature on how government diversion of resources - financial and intellectual - into command-based state research hurts the scientific and technological progress.

State should concentrate on specific goals - like putting weapons or surveilance into space by most efficient methods and leave the rest to private industry.
May be a even a moon mission made sense in 1960s despite undeveloped technology. There were talks of putting weapons on the moon quckly but it might have been a smokescreen.

Look at it this way - if a significant group of people thinks some research is desirable, they can alwys form a private foundation (being more intelligent/educated/affluent than average joe enyway) and produce research and then market the results to the rest of the people. The current approach is that general opoulation is dumb and ignorant to worry about space, but we make them pay for it anyway because we know better... We may get few more gadgets a few years earlier than otherwise but then how would we differ from the non-democratic regimes we oppose?

midnight Target: Big difference here miko, is that while most research may be State funded either directly or indirectly, but it is still done mostly by the private sector.

Whoever pays the piper...
There is a huge difference - in private business people take the risks and either fail or succeed with everyone enjoying the results of their success eventually. So all opportuniteis and approaches are tried. Competition is an engine of discovery.
But a government-sponsored business is not paid to fail - only succeed. A politician cannot be associated with a failing project. So risks are cut drastically and failures are disguised or presented as success because admitting them would cost political capital, funding, etc, not just money risked by private venture capitalists.

In government research, like any other business, you must have right representation of minorities, women, etc. You cannot use people of questionable character, especially if their views are not PC.
Just look at the majority of technological/commertial geniuses to whom we owe the current state of development - they mostly were such scoundrels, rasists, crooks and otherwise unpleasant persons - even admitted communists - that no one would have a chance to be contracted by the government now!

You must score points on political issues like diversity or environment (see an article in my thread on how environmental considerations might have compromised Columbia's safety).
Once you move from competition to command methods, it all the same whether you are in free or totalitarian country.

miko

Dowding · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2003, 01:04:11 PM »

This is the O-club, Rockstar. People are in the habit of expressing their opinions. Get used to it.

Besides which, this isn't 'an American board'. It's not owned by the US government, but I private company.

miko2d · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2003, 01:19:55 PM »

Frogm4n: advance's in science today only come from government funded research labs. Corporations only care about the bottom line not the advacement of the human race. if left up to them we would still be in the 19th century slaves to the factorys we work in.
hell the internet was developed by the army first. The largest from of socialism in this country btw.

That's complete BS - unless you are proposing to abandon democracy.
If majority of people want to develop space, they can do so without government. If majority do not want to develop space, doing so at their expence against their wishes is contrary to democracy principles.
The same evil people who only care about their money while working for corporations, somehow become selfless angels while voting for government policies, right?

You are full of BS. It's not some good enlightened totalitarian dictator who made bad americans live more consiencious lives since 19th century - it's the same americans who you are accusing of being selfish and hidebound.

Internet was nothing compared to the telephone, telegraph, transatlantic cable, redio and TV - and all those were developed privately.
Internet arose and became usefull as soon as privately-produced computers and com. equipment became cost-efficient. Army did not install internet connections in every house and linking two devices with a wire certainly was not an army's invention. Most of internet's traffic and revanue comes from pornography. Is that an army invention too?
Army used radios in the WWI. That does not mean we owe it our catellite-based cellphones now. Private business did that.

miko

AKIron · « **Reply #23 on:** February 03, 2003, 01:32:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
This is the O-club, Rockstar. People are in the habit of expressing their opinions. Get used to it.

Besides which, this isn't 'an American board'. It's not owned by the US government, but I private company.

Dowding, America isn't a government, it's a nation. The private company that owns this board is American and that makes the board American. Of course in America we do value free speech and not just that of our citizens.

Dowding · « **Reply #24 on:** February 03, 2003, 01:37:01 PM »

Apart from the argument over semantics, what exactly is your point?

AKIron · « **Reply #25 on:** February 03, 2003, 01:43:26 PM »

Not just semantics, you were making a point to Rockstar about this not being an American board. Seems to me you are equating our government with our country. I believe you know the difference, but I'm not sure what your point was.

Frogm4n · « **Reply #26 on:** February 03, 2003, 03:20:49 PM »

Quote

You are full of BS. It's not some good enlightened totalitarian dictator who made bad americans live more consiencious lives since 19th century - it's the same americans who you are accusing of being selfish and hidebound

If the government did not step in the robberbarons of the 19th century would have dragged this country down the drain.
You still sidestep on the biggest pork barrel socialist program this country has to offer. the millitary. why are we building a fighter (the f-22) that was made to intercept and destroy a russian fighter that will not even be made. This thing cost 200million a pop and we want upwards of 1000 of these? You talk about how the NASA is full of wastefull spending , but it just a drop in the bucket compared to the cash all the socialist feed defence contrators.

oh and btw i think more then 50 percent of americans want the space program to continue so im not to worried about that.

Rockstar · « **Reply #27 on:** February 03, 2003, 04:30:28 PM »

Hey your opinion is fine and never had a problem of you expressing it here, what with freedom of speech and all that . What I was wondering is how far do you take your opinion, just to the U.S.? Or did offer your world according to dowding space doctrine to that other super power you mentioned too?

Ya know if you haven't then you really should, I bet they'd be just as interested in as we are.

express away mate it's your board too

Dowding · « **Reply #28 on:** February 03, 2003, 04:48:06 PM »

Did you register under an alias to make your point? Registered yesterday and 2 out 3 posts have been aimed at me. Something a little fishy there.

Either way, Chinese isn't my strong point. I do speak some French, and very little German and Spanish however. Not enough to express myself with any kind of clarity, though. Although I would be great at ordering dinner.

miko2d · « **Reply #29 on:** February 03, 2003, 04:48:53 PM »

Frogm4n: If the government did not step in the robberbarons of the 19th century would have dragged this country down the drain.

Since you have not gane a specific example, I cannot counter it, but tThat is just not true.
It stepped in to manage and run the economy rather than prevent the robber barons from violating other people's property rights. And wherever it sstepped in, it cooperated with robber barons instead of limiting them. They may have been more carefull with what they were doing if army did not slaughter indians to clear the way for them. Check the army Corps of Engineers projects. Who ruined the Florida Everglades?

You still sidestep on the biggest pork barrel socialist program this country has to offer. the millitary. why are we building a fighter (the f-22) that was made to intercept and destroy a russian fighter that will not even be made. This thing cost 200million a pop and we want upwards of 1000 of these?
The military is the only valid concern for government besides protecting people's lives property rights.

The rationality of any specific military expence is always open to discussion. What the heck do I know about F22?
How about tanks? Why do we need so many of them? To still fight russians?
What about aircraft carriers? Anyone believes an aircraft carrier can survive a conflict with anyone other than a backward african country?
Antiship missles fly at few feet at mach 2 or higher and huge ships cannot duck. Those missles cost very little and their effectiveness was great decades ago. A missle can hit a plane, let alone a lumbering ship. Alternatively, a nuclead device detonated under water would sink all ships in the area.
Aircraft carriers today are battleship of the WWII - only usefull to bombard helpless civilians and intimidate third-world countries - as ther recent tactical games amply demonstrated

But the military is a thing we cannot possibly privatise. Everything else we can.

oh and btw i think more then 50 percent of americans want the space program to continue.

Oh, great. Why don't we then fund it privately. There are plenty of options there not explored dure to lack of funding. Maybe people are not doing that exactly because they think it is covered by NASA?
What is so special about government that a an agency controlled by it would do better than the same people working for several competing private companies? The worst we would get is several cities inspace and lunar/martian colonies for the same money.

I think you are lying when you say you believe that "more then 50 percent of americans want the space program to continue". If you believed it, you would not insist government - the only organisation that wields coersion implement it. If someone does not want to fund NASA and does not pay that part of the taxes, he/she goes to jail. That's how your space program is implemented - by serf labor, not by free willing people.

miko