Well the fact is the technical innovations by SpaceX have likely impacted what is the best course for the government to follow, even though it was not really a government choice. Like when powered flight was first accomplished and as it became increasingly capable, mostly due to innovation in private industry, some in the Army would have preferred to brush it aside and build better battleships. But the evolution of technology took that away from them as a good course of action. Seriously reconsidering Artemis is in order.

Mod parent Funny.

I wish I had a funny follow up joke, but all I have is the complaint about listening to (and platforming?) every stupid thing any sufficiently rich fool says.

I'll give him credit for winning a couple of lotteries. But someone had to win. Everyone else had to lose--and keep losing if the winners have their way.

He's also lost some lotteries, but so far he's managed to pick more winners than losers.

The problem is projecting from the lotteries to thinking he's some kind of moral authority. He is not. In moral terms, he's one of the vilest money grubbers on the planet. But if you win (or steal) enough money the moral (and legal) questions are supposed to become irrelevant?

I didn't name the name so I have plausible deniability of the ad hominem attack. But you know who I'm talking about from the context, don't you?

He'll probably blow himself on the launch pad

According to Mr Musk's statements on numerous previous occasions, we first set foot on Mars last year (2024) with two crewed and two uncrewed Starships.

I guess the media didn't bother reporting that because Elon wouldn't bullshite us would he?

Oops, I'm running late... I have to catch the hyperloop to LA and pick up my brand new Tesla Roadster.

Ah, Elon, integrity and honesty personified and, now that he's the defacto deputy President of the USA, I see great things ahead for that nation.

Because he spent a shit ton of money to have his rubber stamp "president" elected?

Ask your neighbors who voted for Trump.

Because he and Ramaswamy might be able to convince some powerful people to cut NASA's budget.

Because he owns the private company that managed to revolutionize access to space. All incumbents are between ten and a hundred times more expensive per launched weight than they are. Their price point enables usage of space that was simply impossible due to realities of scale and cost. So if you want to do heavy orbital lifting, which is a necessity for getting to Moon and Mars in any significant way you have to go through SpaceX.

So if you want to conquer space, you can't just give your indigenous transgen

I guess you have no clue how politics in the US works (or how it works in many other countries).

Maybe because he actually has something meaningful to contribute to that? Unlike the many other things he is asked to weigh in on... or that he decides to meddle in. Such as his recent interest in European politics.

Of course there's a massive conflict of interest if he actually does get involved in setting policy.

> Why does this unelected billionaire fucktard have ANY say in what happens with the US space policy or direction?

Because he has more money than sense, and has found a kindred spirit in a yellow-haired clown.

Because he runs the US's most successful and probably most capable space engineering company? Would you suggest US space policy be entirely dictated by politicians with high school educations who point at pictures of stars and talk about alien invaders, without any outside consultation?

Being old enough to have heard the speech, I have to point out that the whole go to the moon thing was a publicity stunt. The USSR had beaten the US in getting a man into orbit. The US had lost a lot of credibility about its technical superiority. So, they decided to do something spectacular that was probably not very useful and that they believed the USSR lacked the ability and resources to do. It is notable that the USSR did even try to compete and that once the initial missions were done, we have nev

It's also why he banged a lot of hookers, not to mention Marilyn Munroe.

> This was essence of Kennedy's speech in the early 60's (where he said "we choose to go to the moon . . .) for you youngsters. ". . . Not because it is easy, but because it is hard."

Yes, this is very similar, but since this is Musk saying it, we must now run around in small circles with our hair on fire and act like it's the worst thing ever. Because reasons.

So Elmo has to pack a shovel. I say we give a royal send off, ticker tape parade, various pols promoting him, etc.

An outpost on the Moon is obviously not outside Earth's gravity well, the Moon orbits us for a reason.

> An outpost on the moon, outside the Earth's gravity well, could be quite useful staging and resupplying a Mars mission.

Not as useful as you might think. The Moon has its own gravity-well, albeit weaker than Earth's, but you still need to exert energy to enter and leave it safely.

An outpost would make sense if you could build the rockets for a Mars mission there. As in, build them out of the Moon regolith somehow. You still need energy, of course, but later on you'd need far less of it to launch the finished rocket from the Moon's surface than from the Earth's.

Better to launch from Earth, hang out as needed in Earth orbit or

HE is not going, not ever, as least not while alive but he will take the credit for enabling " the long-term survival of consciousness"

H1-B's have to stay with their employer for three years anyway.

I haven't seen explicit prohibitions on offworld indentured servitude.

The moon is a harsh mistress....or needs to be.

I think the Moon is under Maritime Law. So ... no?

> Like being outside of the Earth gravity well.

Please stop saying this - it is incorrect.

Luna (the moon) orbits Earth, thus it is in Earth's gravitational sphere of influence. The moon creates it's own gravitational sphere of influence if you are close enough and moving slow enough, but the moon itself is still inside Earth's gravitational influence, and anything on the moon would also still be in Earth's gravitational influence. This is how the Apollo "free return trajectory" worked - they intentionally put the spacecraft on a ballistic trajectory th

Military is actually not the best or inky reason to gave a manned presence on the moon, science is, because of the reasons you mention. Military still has no value on the moon, unless we'll have to fight of aliens from another solarsystem.

> It's a military base.

I doubt that will happen. [1]It's against the Moon Agreement, [nti.org] a supplement to the United Nations Outer Space Treaty. It passed in 1979 and went into effect in 1984. It outlaws military bases on the Moon.

> As Heinlein pointed out, once you have launch capability from the moon you no longer need any nukes at all. And your hits will no longer be radioactive.

But is it even practical to do that, let alone allowed? Heinlein described it in a book. That doesn't necessariy make it a compelling solution to anything.

> Elon may not see value in the moon, but every military on earth does.

I doubt any military on earth would see value in such a remote installation that is mind-bogglingly expensive to set up and maintain, and takes three days to

[1] https://www.nti.org/education-center/treaties-and-regimes/agreement-governing-activities-states-moon-and-other-celestial-bodies-moon-agreement/

think the dinosaurs worked out the flaw in that plan 65 million years ago

Send a boring machine to Mars, dig out minerals, set up industry. People will naturally make their living quarters better and better. It could be a realistic endeavour.

It might be worse than an ego-boosting endeavor, Musk may want to get to Mars because he thinks it will unlock some Xbox accomplishment in the alien videogame he's nearly certain makes up our universe, and maybe earn him a chat with the developers:

[1]https://www.theguardian.com/bo... [theguardian.com]

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/aug/08/the-big-idea-are-we-living-in-a-simulation

So, why can't we float a giant magnet in a synchronous orbit between the Sun and Mars? And/or... get solar sails going to block some direct radiation, but reflect IR to to the poles to heat Mars up?

> He wants to make tons of money to fund SpaceX and go to Mars. I hope this happens sooner rather than later to show people Mars isn't viable for long term survival.

Oh Mars is viable, just not with our current tech.

Day length is fine (people literally live with 24 hours darkness / light when you go far enough north). Gravity is a bigger question, though we don't really have the data, long term weightlessness would be really bad, but mars might be enough for the gravity to adapt.

The real issue is that we need a fairly impressive industrial complex to keep even a few people alive up there and we need a ton of people to run an impressive industrial complex.

You basically n

I have a few "grudges" about Elon, but he is leveraging re-useable, cheap rockets to make money providing internet service to the world, and making a bunch of $$ with it as well. Starship seems brilliant in my humble opinion. Yes, the twitter thing, and him sucking up to Trump kind of makes me sick.. but otherwise... go go go rocket man.

Since he became a right wing cartoon villain?

It really depends on how many Americans we're planning to ship out, but it's doable.

Mars is ok, that's why rovers are great. Send rovers. Sending people is kind of dumb. Or at least until we have affordable ways to get the round trip.

Indeed, he has it exactly backwards. The moon and Mars are in the same ballpark for human habitability, Mars is just over 2 orders of magnitude further away. For his own stated purposes, Mars is the distraction. If you think a long-term off-earth base is needed, there's no compelling reason to go all the way to Mars vs. next door on the moon.

I think even the need for a long-term off-earth base is highly questionable. There are few risks to human life or Earth's habitability that couldn't be mitigated against by a base on Antarctica vs. the moon. Antarctica is a tropical paradise within arm's reach compared to anywhere off-world, with a breathable atmosphere, water, normal gravity, an outdoor environment that would even be survivable without gear for a couple of minutes, even some edible wildlife, but we haven't bothered to set up a backup outpost there. You'd think that mastering that would be a good first step to making any attempts at building off-world bases.

I think the Moon would serve just fine for long term storage of the Maggots. They can all revel in being white. We'll give them their own FOX channel so they can whack off together, just like on Earth.