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

NASA Force

nasaforce.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 343 posts

Re: NASA Force

#191

Post by chrisweekly »

scrumper wrote: post #11

Two things: - I like the rolling Moon animation very much. - This seems like a clever way of getting talent involved during a budget squeeze, presumably with the hope that some of those they attract will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again. I guess it's also a neat kind of try-before-you-buy for both sides. NASA is prestigious and one of the very few places one could do purely…

Thanks for your positive framing and pushback against (possibly knee-jerk) cynicism.

Unrelated tangent: saw HackerSmacker in your profile, plan to try it out, wish it supported iOS.

Re: NASA Force

#192

Post by lucb1e »

daviding wrote: post #17

My 5090 couldn't handle that starfield at the beginning. I got a 1202 alarm just scrolling down..

Strange, it works here in Firefox on Linux using the internal GPU (I don't use primusrun for the browser). Normally I'm the first to notice a particularly heavy website or bad FPS in even pretty old games! Wonder how they managed to make it sluggish on a very expensive GPU but get my crappy setup to run it nicely

Re: NASA Force

#193

Post by thegrim33 »

scrumper wrote: post #11

Two things: - I like the rolling Moon animation very much. - This seems like a clever way of getting talent involved during a budget squeeze, presumably with the hope that some of those they attract will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again. I guess it's also a neat kind of try-before-you-buy for both sides. NASA is prestigious and one of the very few places one could do purely…

>> budget squeeze

>> will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again

2026 budget - 24.4 billion

2025 budget - 24.8 billion

2024 budget - 25.3 billion

2023 budget - 25.3 billion

2022 budget - 24.0 billion

2021 budget - 23.2 billion

2020 budget - 22.6 billion

2019 budget - 21.5 billion

2018 budget - 20.7 billion

2017 budget - 19.6 billion

2016 budget - 19.2 billion

What part of these numbers are you interpreting as some sort of insane budget restriction?

Re: NASA Force

#194

Post by andrewstuart »

thegrim33 wrote: post #193
scrumper wrote: post #11

Two things: - I like the rolling Moon animation very much. - This seems like a clever way of getting talent involved during a budget squeeze, presumably with the hope that some of those they attract will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again. I guess it's also a neat kind of try-before-you-buy for both sides. NASA is prestigious and one of the very few places one could do purely…

>> budget squeeze >> will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again 2026 budget - 24.4 billion 2025 budget - 24.8 billion 2024 budget - 25.3 billion 2023 budget - 25.3 billion 2022 budget - 24.0 billion 2021 budget - 23.2 billion 2020 budget - 22.6 billion 2019 budget - 21.5 billion 2018 budget - 20.7 billion 2017 budget - 19.6 billion 2016 budget - 19.2 billion What part of these nu…

You’re kinda implying that there’s a few people standing around in a shed, and that really don’t cost too much.

Re: NASA Force

#195

Post by zamadatix »

thegrim33 wrote: post #193
scrumper wrote: post #11

Two things: - I like the rolling Moon animation very much. - This seems like a clever way of getting talent involved during a budget squeeze, presumably with the hope that some of those they attract will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again. I guess it's also a neat kind of try-before-you-buy for both sides. NASA is prestigious and one of the very few places one could do purely…

>> budget squeeze >> will still be around after this congress and the agency can stabilize once again 2026 budget - 24.4 billion 2025 budget - 24.8 billion 2024 budget - 25.3 billion 2023 budget - 25.3 billion 2022 budget - 24.0 billion 2021 budget - 23.2 billion 2020 budget - 22.6 billion 2019 budget - 21.5 billion 2018 budget - 20.7 billion 2017 budget - 19.6 billion 2016 budget - 19.2 billion What part of these nu…

24.4 in 2026 is less than 19.2 in 2016. I wouldn't call it a giant squeeze or anything though, but these raw numbers almost imply the opposite kind of misunderstanding.

Re: NASA Force

#196

Post by FarmerPotato »

tiberone wrote: post #36

> NASA Force technologists inside the systems that power American spaceflight, aeronautics, and scientific discovery. Am I an idiot or does their leading sentence make absolutely no sense?

Yikes, they are pushing their low-level employees into the rocket nozzles and fuel tanks? There's no room inside an RTG to fit an intern... Hopefully it means welders, metrologists, inspectors, etc.

Re: NASA Force

#197

Post by thegrim33 »

mmcconnell1618 wrote: post #173

NASA "Force?" It sounds very similar to Space Force and Air Force and adds a militaristic tone to NASA. Maybe that is the intent. I know that NASA and the military are closely linked but the general brand of NASA is a the science-focused civilian side while something like Space Force would be the military side.

It is a word with multiple meanings. One such meaning is "a group of people brought together and organized for a particular activity."

Re: NASA Force

#198

Post by jjk166 »

moomin wrote: post #67
nozzlegear wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, drug screenings for employees can only benefit NASA given the kind of work they do.

As if the job of NASA wasn’t to get some select people as high as possible.

Who needs MDMA when you got UDMH?

Re: NASA Force

#199

Post by jjk166 »

cheschire wrote: post #179
jjk166 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt the president of the united states is personally reviewing the wording of low level job postings.

GP was discussing the overall name “nasa force”, not the wording of the job postings

The name of the job posting is part of the wording of the job posting, and very likely not reviewed by the president.

Re: NASA Force

#200

Post by dboreham »

stronglikedan wrote: post #177
sailfast wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had these kinds of programs for a long time, but many of the engineers were vilified and the programs disbanded as soon as this administration took office. I'm not sure why someone would sign up to work for a government that has no respect for its employees (or a company for that matter) if they already have gainful employment. In fact, a bunch of NASA labs were recently closed where folks with this exact skills…

[flagged]

The entire DOGE program was an exercise in vilifiaction.
Post reply on HN