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

Artemis II Launch Day Updates

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#471

Post by XorNot »

m_fayer wrote: post #286
trhway wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The expanse future isn't that bad - even at the start of the series we've already made it to the asteroid belt and Jupiter moons, and the civilization consists of several sovereign self-governed entities with individual entrepreneurship and private enterprise allowed. It means we didn't annihilate ourself in a nuclear war, nor our civilization collapsed into allways-fully-connected ant colony (or one global fascist/c…

Agreed it’s a tolerable vision, it could be worse. But it’s also a vision of humanity mostly living in enormous disenfranchised structural underclasses - corporate-authoritarianism in the asteroids and subsistence-UBI for all those unnecessary humans on Earth. It’s a vision of incredible technological progress without any growth in our ability to justly and humanely govern ourselves or move past violent conflict. I a…

I don't know that there was a lot wrong with Earth under the Expanse though.

The problems there were kind of organic: they just didn't need that many people, but they did have UBI, but even if you wanted to better yourself and were exceptional at your job... You could still be 50,001 in the queue of the 50,000 they needed.

Earth in the expanse desperately needed places to expand too and send people, but the solar system just wasn't that habitable.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#472

Post by none2585 »

NetMageSCW wrote: post #430
none2585 wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are basically going this to funnel more tax payer dollars to musk or bezos. What a moment for humanity

Wrong in every way.

> The mission's objectives are to conduct tests in low Earth orbit with one or both commercially developed lunar landers—SpaceX's Starship HLS and Blue Origin's Blue Moon—and the Axiom Extravehicular Mobility Unit (AxEMU) space suit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artemis_III?wprov=sfla1

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#473

Post by bawolff »

general_reveal wrote: post #365
curiousgal wrote: post #324

[flagged]

Well. You are getting down voted but here I am in later stages in life watching this Moon launch, and unlike other times in past, I didn’t feel any inspiration. Honestly, it’s a waste of money. That’s my final answer, there’s kids that need food. I am no longer inspired by this stuff. I’ve seen enough advanced technology for many lifetimes, we need something else as a species (more of that humanity thing).

I find it crazy how whenever space stuff or even fundamental science stuff in general gets talked about, the its a waste of money crowd comes out. Everyone is totally fine with the AI bullshit of the day or the people spending millions on a start ups whose pitch is so stupid it sounds like something that would have been rejected from silicon valley the tv show, but suddenly if its for science its a bridge to far.

You want to save the world? by all means have at it. But let the science peeps do science things. Its not like the world would be any more saved if they weren't doing these things.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#474

Post by randomNumber7 »

nodesocket wrote: post #328
nodesocket wrote: post #272

The SpaceX cameras of live launches are way better. This NASA stream is mostly all computer generated art after the initial pad launch. Hardly any live space feeds from the ship.

The lack of NASA live feeds from space is very disappointing. Our tax dollars at work.

SpaceX can also reuse their rockets by landing them backwards.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#475

Post by sollewitt »

SecretDreams wrote: post #417
sollewitt wrote: post #384

[flagged]

It's being marketed like it's a vanity project, but it's not. This has been in the works for some time and so many people have given everything they have to make it happen. Completely agree with you re: climate change being an existential threat, but disagree with your hyperbole about the US being the worst offender. The US should lead because they are supposed to be a world leader - but they alone are not singularly…

I didn’t mean to be hyperbolic, for carbon footprint I’m looking at cumulative footprint since 1750 and not only recent annual footprint. I’m glad we agree, I take your notes.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#476

Post by JumpCrisscross »

justinator wrote: post #444
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sometimes, clinically: yes Sure. Compared to population, no. > More than we can send Which astronauts said they’d be fine with a one-way mission? > Wasn't there a country-wide competition? Was there? You’re the one making the claim.

Glad you agree with the crazy. Google is your friend re; Mars one-way astronauts.

> Glad you agree with the crazy

I don’t. Having mental illness in a population below baseline rates isn’t crazy. Nowak’s story is notable for a reason.

> Google is your friend re; Mars one-way astronauts

So you don’t have a source. Because I’m not finding any astronauts going on the record on this.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#477

Post by matthewmcg »

bluGill wrote: post #311
intrasight wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. I watched Apollo 11 launch in 1969 when I was four. Watched on our neighbor's TV. We didn't have one. Imagine what we could accomplish if we didn't suck.

sending people to the moon was never useful. We can get more done with robots, both cheaper and safer. There are plenty of more useful things we can do instead. okay what is more useful is a matter of opinion. you can disagree, but I stand by it

That’s fair but the amount of interest in this crewed mission vs. prior uncrewed and robotic moon missions shows that many people find manned missions more compelling.

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#478

Post by mulmen »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #300

April 6: flyby April 10: splashdown After that, the exciting work will be in Starship making LEO and testing propellant transfer (a humanity first) [1] and Blue Origin testing its rocket and lunar lander [2], both scheduled for 2026, to enable Artemis II (EDIT: III), currently scheduled—optimistically, in my opinion—for next year. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Starship_launches#Futu... [2] https://en.wiki…

This mission is Artemis II. Is Artemis III the one with a lander?

Re: Artemis II Launch Day Updates

#480

Post by mrexroad »

Apocryphon wrote: post #390
justinator wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just need to look locally and see we're in trouble. NIST, NCAR. Super Drought conditions forming in the West. This isn't good. But hurray Moon missions, I guess. Pity we're causing the entire World Economy to collapse with a unneeded war.

Rather unfortunate timing that the original Apollo moon landing also happened in the middle of the Vietnam War.

Well, when you zoom out a bit, it’s not a stretch to say that both Apollo and Vietnam shared the same goal of countering the USSR.
Post reply on HN