228
submitted 7 months ago by return2ozma@lemmy.world to c/space@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

You do realize these "commercial companies" such as SpaceX are funded by government contracts right? You're not telling me anything I don't already know. And you're also not going to change my opinion. Space isn't meant to be the next capitalist playground, which is what we are trying to do.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 months ago

You do realize these "commercial companies" such as SpaceX are funded by government contracts right?

Yes, but it will be cheaper for NASA to outsource cargo and crew transport than if they did everything themselves. Just look at the success of the NASA's Commercial Resupply Services and Commercial Crew programs. Cygnus, Dragon, and Falcon 9 are way cheaper than Orion and Ares I would have been for low earth orbit.

This leaves NASA with more resources to devote towards interesting science and exploration missions. I don't see why lunar exploration would be any different.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

Yes, but it will be cheaper for NASA to outsource cargo and crew transport than if they did everything themselves.

That is absolutely wrong. Commercialization in the space sector is - without exception - ALWAYS more expensive in the long run. Not only do you have inefficient company structures much like the public sector administration, you now also have to finance the insane profit margins of some egomaniacs like the little rat that runs shitter these days.

[-] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 4 points 7 months ago

This argument gets made a lot when talking about privatisation. Lots basic and essential services have gotten privatised over we decades, and none of them got better or cheaper.

The only way you can benefit from privatizing something is when you make others pay for it. In this case, SpaceX is burning other people's venture capital like rocketfuel. I prefer that over spending public money, but unfortunately, they've also spent 1.9billion on a moon lander, with nothing to show.

[-] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

Lots basic and essential services have gotten privatised over we decades, and none of them got better or cheaper.

This seems like a rather broad statement. Are there really zero cases where a privatized service got cheaper? Do you disagree with the example of NASA’s CRS and CCP programs in my previous comment?

but unfortunately, they’ve also spent 1.9billion on a moon lander, with nothing to show

I think stating that they have nothing to show is slightly disingenuous. They've done multiple successful suborbital hops with upper stage prototypes, and two (partially successful) launches of the full stack. I'm eagerly awaiting IFT-3, which could happen as early as March.

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Space is unfathomably enormous. I'd much rather have heavy industry fucking up shit in space than destroying our planet to strip it of its resources. I say let them go up there for asteroid/moon/whatever mining.

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Yes, that's true, but low earth orbit isn't. If we put too much junk up there, we can kiss going to space goodbye.

[-] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

we can kiss going to space goodbye.

and all satellite services, such as GPS & earth observation...

[-] bassomitron@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I didn't say anything about LEO, as last I checked there isn't much heavy industry that would be appealing to do in that area. Asteroid or moon mining and production would be outside of LEO. But yes, too much space garbage in LEO is a bad thing that should definitely be avoided as much as possible.

I just think taking a strict anti-commercial stance in space is a bit naive and unreasonable. Like I said, it's enormous, who gives a shit what Blue Origin or SpaceX or whoever ends up doing in the asteroid belt a hundred years from now?

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Did you miss the part where I said I work in the space industry, I have 10 years of engineering experience, and I've been out of school a long damn time. Don't insult my intelligence. I'm not a child, and I'm certainly not naive. Go spout off your uninformed opinions elsewhere. I'm in a bad mood today, haven't been sleeping well, and I really don't feel like explaining basic shit to you just so you understand my point of view.

[-] ricdeh@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Luckily, the moon is in Low Earth Orbit! It's good to have you on out side, comrade

[-] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

The moon isn't in LEO actually. But you have to go through LEO to get there.

[-] ikka@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 7 months ago

Space isn’t meant to be the next capitalist playground, which is what we are trying to do.

Regardless of what it's "meant" to be it will be the final capitalist playground.

this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
228 points (97.5% liked)

Space

8341 readers
722 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS