Is it possible for someone other than NASA to send a message to the rover? I'd be happy throwing a little money at a project to ping it monthly to see if there is a response.
Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
31–40 of 235 posts
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#32RIP we will never forget you.
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI doesn't work nearly as well as you seem to think it does. For something as excruciatingly difficult as a space mission, humans have proven to be well up to the task. The headline of this article here is one illustrative data point. Furthermore, many methods that are currently classified as "AI" act because of very complex and often opaque emergent behavior, and we often have a hard time (or don't know at all) why…
If space exploration were a robot-first, robot-only affair, we would probably have cheaper, better, far more capable robots today... And also more humans in space then the 3 that currently occupy the ISS.
actually, since the end of the cold war, space exploration is a robot-first endeavor (and apart from ISS robot-only -- think of the countless exploratory missions, hubble, the rovers etc). the ISS barely counts as space exploration
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#34Was looking through Opportunity's Wikipedia page, and found this cool comparison of the embedded systems used in Mars rovers:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_compute...
That lead me to the RAD6000 page, which was new to me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000
"Reported to have a unit cost somewhere between US$200,000 and US$300,000, RAD6000 computers were released for sale in the general commercial market in 1996"
Anybody know why the per unit cost is so high? Low yields or is it that much more expensive?
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
that doesnt answer my question
AI doesn't work nearly as well as you seem to think it does. For something as excruciatingly difficult as a space mission, humans have proven to be well up to the task. The headline of this article here is one illustrative data point. Furthermore, many methods that are currently classified as "AI" act because of very complex and often opaque emergent behavior, and we often have a hard time (or don't know at all) why…
This is one of those classic situations where the "why not both" meme is really appropriate. AIs and Robots and Humans working together.
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
that doesnt answer my question
AI doesn't work nearly as well as you seem to think it does. For something as excruciatingly difficult as a space mission, humans have proven to be well up to the task. The headline of this article here is one illustrative data point. Furthermore, many methods that are currently classified as "AI" act because of very complex and often opaque emergent behavior, and we often have a hard time (or don't know at all) why…
you do realize the mars rover was supposed to last 90 days? and we re still receiving data from the voyagers.
any robot missions to mars will still be remotely-orchestrated, however AI can be used to manage the time lag between earth and mars
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI doesn't work nearly as well as you seem to think it does. For something as excruciatingly difficult as a space mission, humans have proven to be well up to the task. The headline of this article here is one illustrative data point. Furthermore, many methods that are currently classified as "AI" act because of very complex and often opaque emergent behavior, and we often have a hard time (or don't know at all) why…
If space exploration were a robot-first, robot-only affair, we would probably have cheaper, better, far more capable robots today... And also more humans in space then the 3 that currently occupy the ISS.
Define "robot"?
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#38Was looking through Opportunity's Wikipedia page, and found this cool comparison of the embedded systems used in Mars rovers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_compute... That lead me to the RAD6000 page, which was new to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000 "Reported to have a unit cost somewhere between US$200,000 and US$300,000, RAD6000 computers were released for sale in the general co…
Low sales, meaning the R&D cost (which'll be higher than a non rad hard chip anyway) can't be as easily amortized. And probably half of it is or so is just the .gov markup.
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#39Was looking through Opportunity's Wikipedia page, and found this cool comparison of the embedded systems used in Mars rovers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_compute... That lead me to the RAD6000 page, which was new to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000 "Reported to have a unit cost somewhere between US$200,000 and US$300,000, RAD6000 computers were released for sale in the general co…
[deleted]
Re: Nasa’s Mars Rover Opportunity Concludes a 15-Year Mission
#40Was looking through Opportunity's Wikipedia page, and found this cool comparison of the embedded systems used in Mars rovers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_embedded_compute... That lead me to the RAD6000 page, which was new to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RAD6000 "Reported to have a unit cost somewhere between US$200,000 and US$300,000, RAD6000 computers were released for sale in the general co…
I would assume the kinds of use cases that people might need radiation hardened equipment for just have people willing to spend much more money. They're charging what people are willing to pay, not how much it costs to make.