Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

heraldsun.com.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#71

Post by felipemnoa »

vesky wrote: post #60
THE_PUN_STOPS wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah, as a 17 year old, that blows my mind. I cannot wait to see what humanity accomplishes in my lifetime. Personally, I'm hoping to see the first man's footsteps on mars.

I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing. We should start thinking along the terms of "I cannot wait to DO that!" if we ever want the chance to follow in the footsteps of a man like Neil and succeed in taking human achievement further than our predecessors. But hey... you're 17 and you read HN. That's a good start!

>>I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing

Speak for yourself.

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#72

Post by alx »

astrojams wrote: post #70
THE_PUN_STOPS wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah, as a 17 year old, that blows my mind. I cannot wait to see what humanity accomplishes in my lifetime. Personally, I'm hoping to see the first man's footsteps on mars.

I'd prefer a cleaner healthier planet than foodsteps on Mars. We need to learn to take care of this planet before we start messing around with other planets.

You'd get neither when you could have both. A bit far fetched : "He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither."

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#73

Post by caf »

jballanc wrote: post #31

Neil Armstrong would have been 17 years old when Orville Wright died in 1948. In the lifespan of those two men, humanity went from horse-and-buggy to standing on the moon. One wonders what the 17 year olds of today might accomplish...

The steam locomotive, rather than the horse and buggy, was probably the apex of transport technology when Orville was born.

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#74

Post by herval »

daeken wrote: post #49
herval wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out humanity's real soul (at least most of it) is always looking for gimmicks to waste their time - be it compulsive little "games", the gadget of the week, etc, etc. I wish we had more Armstrongs. Truly inspiring man indeed...

People have always had their ways to escape; prayer, sewing, radio, books, TV. That doesn't mean we're in any less capable position to do amazing things. Do I think we take our information-rich world for granted? Yes. Does that make us lazy or in any way bad? No.

I'm not implying people from the past where any more productive or interested in challenge than today's (they were not). The main difference, though, is that a larger number of people leave in stable/confortable enough lives today than in the past - thus the number of people doing nothing but indulging themselves is proportionally larger...

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#75

Post by olalonde »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #50

I remember watching a documentary which quite rarely featured Neil Armstrong (and Buzz and Collins) discussing the actual trip to the moon. They related a story where they instructed the computer to begin reverse thrusters to slow their approach to the moon. The computer came back with a code which Collins duly looked up in the manual 3E - Are you sure? Twas ever thus. It stuck in my mind, as humanising people who ot…

Can't find a reference to the story you are mentioning, could you share a link that explains it in more details?

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#76

Post by waterlesscloud »

nkoren wrote: post #41
burke wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

xkcd ran the numbers: http://xkcd.com/893/

Ah, yes, the mouseover text on that is brilliant, and apt: "The universe is probably littered with the one-planet graves of cultures which made the sensible economic decision that there's no good reason to go into space--each discovered, studied, and remembered by the ones who made the irrational decision." Personally, I'm optimistic that there'll be boots on the moon sometime around 2020 (although I suspect they won…

I'm going to need to see some evidence before I believe societies make economic decisions sensibly.

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#77

Post by hansef »

astrojams wrote: post #70
THE_PUN_STOPS wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Woah, as a 17 year old, that blows my mind. I cannot wait to see what humanity accomplishes in my lifetime. Personally, I'm hoping to see the first man's footsteps on mars.

I'd prefer a cleaner healthier planet than foodsteps on Mars. We need to learn to take care of this planet before we start messing around with other planets.

When I hear the "shouldn't we solve poverty and climate change here first?" argument about space exploration, I feel it's useful to remember that almost all improvement in the human condition throughout history is directly attributable to advances in human technology grounded in investment in exploration and basic research. Spending on science, technology development and exploration are the real "trickle down economics". I don't think it has to be an either-or proposition. ;)

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#78

Post by bermanoid »

herval wrote: post #74
daeken wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People have always had their ways to escape; prayer, sewing, radio, books, TV. That doesn't mean we're in any less capable position to do amazing things. Do I think we take our information-rich world for granted? Yes. Does that make us lazy or in any way bad? No.

I'm not implying people from the past where any more productive or interested in challenge than today's (they were not). The main difference, though, is that a larger number of people leave in stable/confortable enough lives today than in the past - thus the number of people doing nothing but indulging themselves is proportionally larger...

You say that as if it's a bad thing.

To me, "the number of people doing nothing but indulging themselves is proportionally larger" sounds like a good thing, a clear indicator that we've come a long way - we're so well off now that you don't actually have to do anything useful in order to survive. That's awesome, to the extent that it's true.

Our goal should be a day when nobody has to work, and everything that we want done happens anyways. We're still pretty far from that, but I think motion in that direction is a positive indicator, not a negative one.

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#79

Post by MichaelApproved »

felipemnoa wrote: post #71
vesky wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing. We should start thinking along the terms of "I cannot wait to DO that!" if we ever want the chance to follow in the footsteps of a man like Neil and succeed in taking human achievement further than our predecessors. But hey... you're 17 and you read HN. That's a good start!

>>I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing Speak for yourself.

I think OP is referring to traveling in space himself rather than just watching a select few do it.

Re: Neil Armstrong has died at 82 Today

#80

Post by vesky »

felipemnoa wrote: post #71
vesky wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing. We should start thinking along the terms of "I cannot wait to DO that!" if we ever want the chance to follow in the footsteps of a man like Neil and succeed in taking human achievement further than our predecessors. But hey... you're 17 and you read HN. That's a good start!

>>I'm 21 myself and by what I see around me in my friends and people close my age is that we've become too accustomed to seeing instead of doing Speak for yourself.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4433358

Does it look like I'm speaking for the whole population? I've clearly stated "me" and "my friends and [some] people close my age". Sincere congratulations if you've managed to become the next Alan Turing but next time leave the snarky comments for yourself buddy. Thanks!

Post reply on HN