this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2024
209 points (85.2% liked)

Technology

59422 readers
3183 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Sources:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zoot@reddthat.com 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I'm all for giving Nasa the light of day again, but from what I can tell, "Its not in the American interests" to give Nasa a good budget.

Yeah yeah yeah they overspend, are bad at budgeting, and have issues. But im quite stubborn, space science and research is priceless in my book.

So, if SpaceX is owned by a shit bag narcissist, but atleast space research is advancing? Well, that's fine with me. I feel very happy for all the jobs and scientists and aerospace engineers who have a job thanks to SpaceX.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Serious question - is it nasa over spending, or is it congress forcing certain requirements on them making things more complicated that leads to over spending?

[–] Zoot@reddthat.com 3 points 1 month ago

I am by no means a good source. From what I've read and seen it definitely seems like that is part of the issue. I believe for a time Nasa was also hugely underselling the real cost (likely so they could get it pushed through in the first place) which also lead to issues of its own.