andrewducker (
andrewducker) wrote2011-12-12 11:00 am
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
- adblock,
- advertising,
- alien,
- alternative,
- apple,
- architecture,
- awesome,
- banana,
- business,
- character,
- comic,
- comics,
- dnd,
- europe,
- firefox,
- funny,
- germany,
- iphone,
- iss,
- law,
- links,
- motorola,
- music,
- opinion,
- patents,
- reality,
- republicans,
- roleplaying,
- satire,
- sculpture,
- space,
- spacex,
- spotify,
- tarot,
- tv,
- uk,
- usa,
- voting,
- webcomic
Interesting Links for 12-12-2011
- First Private Spaceship Flight to the ISS now has a date.
- Motorola secures Europe-wide sales ban on iPhone, iPad - oh for goodness sake.
- This Banana Alien Might Have Ascorbic Acid for Blood
- The Evolution of Fictional Characters
- If Tarot Cards Actually Predicted the Future
- D&D;: More accurate than you think
- Problems with anti-Mormons and anti-Adulterers - will the demographics hurt the Republicans?
- 57% of people thought that David Cameron was right to use the veto, with 14% disagreeing and 29% don’t know.
- Alternative Engineering - the future of architecture!
- Why Spotify can never be profitable: The secret demands of record labels
- AdBlock Plus to allow "acceptable" ads by default soon. I'm actually in favour of this.
no subject
I'm interested in the description of it as a successful public-private partnership. That definitely seems to be the case: probably no-one would have gone to space if the United States and Russian governments hadn't gone it first, and created a vast body of experience. But conversely, NASA was getting moribund, and having someone drive the creation of new rockets designed somewhat practically seems (judgement pending) to have been necessary.
But the necessary prerequisites seem to be (a) one man with a vision (b) a lot of people with extensive experience happy to get onboard (c) from somewhere, ridiculous amounts of funding. (Are people investing in SpaceX because they think it's commercially viable, they expected to recoup there profits some way other than success of the company, or because the amount of money isn't actually that much for investors and it's worth gambling, or because they think it's cool and _might_ work and want to support it?) I'm not sure if this is a vindication of our current system of "government funds pie-in-the-sky research, later free enterprise takes over when it starts to be viable" or is a "it worked despite the current mess of a system, what would work better?"
no subject
http://www.airspacemag.com/space-exploration/Visionary-Launchers-Employees.html
(Posted a couple of weeks ago, but very good)
I do think that getting the human race into space in the first place was such a big job that it required governments, and SpaceX is using a lot of the things learned during that original exploration. But everything I read about the shuttle tells me that it was a bad decision to make it the way we did.