I have yet another unpopular opinion.
It’s either a “private lunar lander” or “the U.S. is back on the moon”, but not both.
@USelaine Looks like it’s a publicly listed company, so the real story is that global pension funds have landed on the moon.
@beeoproblem @rsynnott @USelaine
And the box full of art pieces, ... for which NFTs will be sold, for funding.
@USelaine isn't it "NASA paid a contractor"? The reason billionaires are in that business is to get access to the firehose of US government aerospace spending.
@USelaine There's an hilarious amount of wordsmithing that has gone into inventing a way to describe this as a "first".
@USelaine With lawyer hat on, under international law the state a vessel is registered to is responsible for it (& its laws apply within the vessel).
https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties.html
"Odysseus spacecraft lands on moon"
news:
https://news.google.com/search?q=Odysseus%20spacecraft%20lands%20on%20moon
@JeffGrigg @USelaine
"Odious spacecraft lands on moon"
@USelaine this is all really about degrees, too. The 1960s-1970s lunar lander was designed and built by Grumman under contract to NASA.
@mackensen @USelaine It’s almost difficult to comprehend the interconnected nature of the space program at that time. Grumman may have built significant parts, but the Apollo Guidance Computer was built by Raytheon in cooperation with MIT’s Draper Lab.
In software we talk about how it’s impossible to completely remove complexity, you just move it around. NASA is moving the complexity of managing the manufacture of space hardware to private companies, so they can focus on the science objectives.
@mackensen @USelaine right, but it was operated by NASA
@USelaine @nyrath "NASA gives contractor money to build a spacecraft" is how this usually works, back to Surveyor (and likewise for ESA and JAXA).
But your point is important because CLPS program management has been switching between "these are NASA missions" and "these are private missions" to avoid enforcing some of the usual rules for NASA contractors on Intuitive Machines and Astrobotic.
@USelaine It’s technically both as private companies pretty much build most (if not all) of the components necessary to get to space (even NASA heavily uses companies to build their stuff).
It’s only a question of who is paying for it. In the lunar lander case, NASA was a primary customer of Intuitive Machines, so the government is claiming credit for this landing as well (even though a private company build the lander): https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/22/world/moon-landing-intuitive-machines-nasa-scn/index.html
@USelaine Corporations and states are profoundly interrelated. The idea that they are separate and distinct is a complete fiction.
@USelaine “Both Astrobotic’s Peregrine and IM’s Odysseus are financially supported in part through NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services program or CLPS (pronounced “clips”). They both carried a suite of science instruments onboard with the goal of furthering knowledge about the Moon in the run-up to sending humans to the surface through the Artemis program.”– Spaceflight Now
@USelaine why do you believe the private sector is divorced from the country?
The country is the sum of all its parts.
If the US creates the environment for private moon landings, then the US landed on the moon.
Or does the US not win world championships because the sports aren't nationalized?
@USelaine
1969: we come in peace for all mankind
2024: we come to make some fucking money!!! Give me those rare elements and minerals! Let’s dig up the moon
@thedansimonson Nice try but it wasn't "in peace for all mankind". It was "dem freakin soviets brought the first ship into space, first dog, first man, first satellite... we must do something" and so they littered the moon, not putting a flag of peace there but a US flag which was well understood as "licked it, put flag on it, so this is ours!!!" leading to some not so peaceful "discussions".
@Pentropy @thedansimonson I’m right there with you—this is about them dropping even the pretenses of peaceful exploration. Neoliberalism has stripped the façade of altruism and replaced it with one of open greed.
@USelaine you are right, it could not be a public-private collaboration because we believe in either pure socialism, or alternatively pure capitalism, and in any case the whole concept that complex mixed economies could in fact exist is a kind of apostasy among those of us on the left. Capitalism is a monster, and denying how capital's tentacular operates will certainly help us defeat it.
@USelaine the US is the only country that provides the wealth, the prosperity, the freedom to make something like that possible. it might have been a private endeavor but was possible only with the opportunities given by the greatest nation on the planet! so as we all do our part to build this country and keep it running we are all a part, also of this moon landing!*
*Puerto Ricans must not apply
@USelaine US public tax $$$ paid for a private company to take the moon.
@USelaine
I think it can be both if it has the name of a private company, but the government paid for it.