this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
92 points (88.3% liked)

Technology

58012 readers
3121 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Many Americans think NASA returning to the moon is a waste of time and it should prioritize asteroid hunting instead, a poll shows::Americans like NASA, but don't support their funding going towards moon missions, according to new polls.

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Who the heck did they survey that had this contradictory thought? 69% of dem and 70% of repub dissaprove of moon mission but 62% overall want more space travel?????? How do they think we plan to have more space travel without a moon base?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they are bad ay data, cause that would be 31% Dem and 30% rep approve so add them together and round up a little and boom 62% approval

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I point out why this is wrong but I suspect it wouldn’t help.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

....well it might not help because I did it wrong on purpose trying to sort out why the OG article messed up? Unless I'm misunderstanding you

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

A ‘no take, only throw’ mentality.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The only reason it would make sense to return to the moon is to establish a base for exploration of Mars. I go really back and forth on space exploration. On one hand it is a giant money pit. On another, the research that has come out of space exploration has been beneficial to life here on earth.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The technologies we invent along the way are worth the investment, in my opinion. Look at everything that came out of the original space race.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Nah. If we go back to the Moon, we are going to need more than "new technologies", but an actual purpose.

Right now, Helium-3, rare earth metals, and a slingshot to the rest of the solar system are good reasons to colonize the Moon if we can figure out how to do it cheaply.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

like ICBMs and freeze dried ice cream sandwiches!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The technological breakthroughs aside, the first company that returns with mined goods from space is gonna be worth trillions.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

A massive amount of Americans are idiots so I would not trust what they have to say. To get our selves to the outer planets we need to perfect the tools that will allow us to reach planets. The moon is a great place to perfect those tools.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

I'm glad that science isn’t a democracy.

However, I’m not so glad about NASA having to follow the current US Congress' whims all the time.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Where do these oddballs (who approve of space programs, but not moon missions) think those asteroid mining missions are going to launch from?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you want to hunt asteroids, go to the moon.

You read that right. What “many Americans” aren’t thinking about is that we are at the bottom of a very big gravity well here on Earth. Launching anything into space, like an asteroid destroyer, takes enormous energy to accomplish.

If instead we could launch from the moon, we’d be able to get bigger things into space faster and cheaper and more often. But to do this we need a base and a way to manufacture fuel. The raw materials are there, but we don’t have any of the infrastructure built.

Eventually we HAVE to get to a point where we are mining, refueling, and building off-Earth. The only thing we should be launching from Earth is people.

The moon is our first stop on this evolutionary path.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

Asteroid hunting is simply tracking them. You do not need to be on the moon for that. Satellite telescopes would do just fine. Doing something about those asteroids? Having something on the moon could be helpful, sure but getting the necessary manufacturing on the moon to deflect a possible asteroid would be massive and likely not something that we would prioritize considering it would likely be a one off event.

I'm perfectly happy going back to the moon, BTW. I'd prefer Mars but I'll settle for the moon. But NASA can walk and chew gum at the same time. They can hunt asteroids and go back to the moon.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Many Americans are anti-intellectual science deniers.

I do not hold in high esteem opinions based on woo-woo.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

We should have NASA's priorities determined by poll results from bar trivia machines.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Note the use of "many Americans" in the headline. If it was most they'd have said most. Clickbait headlines are the worst.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

I remember a TED talk that sold me on big science: For every dollar we spent on the moon shots, we made fourteen.

The thing is, going to the moon involved doing a lot of development, and this time we're going to the moon better and are going to do more things.

At some point we'll want to put a colony up there, and will need still more development to make it work.

A lot of the technology that we use today was developed thanks to the space race. In fact, when the USSR was taking its victory laps for Sputnik, Eisenhower freaked out, signed the National Aeronautics and Space Act and then extended a grant to Fairchild Semiconductor which started the digital revolution in Silicon Valley, eventually propelling us into the cyberpunk dystopia of smart refrigerators and zombie bot-nets that we know today.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Both would be best. Go to the moon and use it as a base/staging area for both asteroid hunting, and further reaching space travel.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Business Insider is a shady source.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Since when did we need to flip a coin on issues like this? Spoiler: We don't! There are plenty of resources to go around.

If anything was a waste of time, it was this poll. Go home, Pew Research, you're drunk.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

this may be an asinine fear based on my rudimentary knowledge, but I hope they never drill the moon, because human greed can't be contained and some dumb ass will just see $$$ signs and want to mine the whole thing up. Then there goes a ton of shit that we depend on the moons gravity for.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The moon is a fourth the size of Earth. Even if we had the infrastructure and technology (spoiler, we don’t), we can’t even make a tiny tiny tiny tiny dent in the moon, at least in the next hundred years or so. Heck, nuking the moon with every nuke humanity has won’t even make a noticeable dent in the moon!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I guess it's expected since showing the innovations and returns that could come from a project like this is hard.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Lagrange point station would be neat.