51–60 of 185 posts
We can't even reliably build them for anything approaching a sane cost on Earth. I hope they're going to build a bankruptcy court up there, too
I do think this is running before we can stand. We can't even launch our own rockets/space craft https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-64218883
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FAANG spending isn’t the norm, the total program cost of the Mars 2020 rover was $2.7 billion. Meta spent $30 billion on something that looks like SecondLife on the Wii… But also this ain’t the total cost just how much money the UK government is funding the project for right now.
It’s really mind boggling how much money Meta spent on this thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FAANG spending isn’t the norm, the total program cost of the Mars 2020 rover was $2.7 billion. Meta spent $30 billion on something that looks like SecondLife on the Wii… But also this ain’t the total cost just how much money the UK government is funding the project for right now.
Did they seriously spend that much money on it??? How???
But the cumulative cost of Reality Labs was apparently indeed $36B over 3 years.
Wish them all the best, really. But I'm really curious what the study actually provided/concluded in terms of the stated goal of using the money to research the development of such a reactor. Because unless the British are so much more efficient than the EU for example, this kind of money just bought a short conversation with McKinsey.
P.S. I think it bought a press release [0].
[0] https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2023/...
> The new boost to Rolls-Royce’s research pot follows a previous $303,495 (£249,000) study funded by the U.K. Space Agency in 2022 Wish them all the best, really. But I'm really curious what the study actually provided/concluded in terms of the stated goal of using the money to research the development of such a reactor. Because unless the British are so much more efficient than the EU for example, this kind of money…
Amongst other things, it would provide for powering installations on the dark side of the moon where there is no solar power.
The US army used a miniature nuclear reactor to power Camp Century in Greenland in the 60s [1]. Obviously that base had some important differences to a moon base (like being surrounded by water ice and atmosphere) and technology has advanced a bit since then, but I wonder how much you would have to change the design to make it a viable moon base. 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Century
https://theconversation.com/remembering-antarcticas-nuclear-...