heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
the Moon
- KUTradition
- Contributor
- Posts: 11207
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:53 am
the Moon
Have we fallen into a mesmerized state that makes us accept as inevitable that which is inferior or detrimental, as though having lost the will or the vision to demand that which is good?
Re: the Moon
Depends on what "should" means. Is the question is, what's fair and right? Or what should someone in the US' shoes do? Answers may not be the same.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:17 pm heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
- KUTradition
- Contributor
- Posts: 11207
- Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2022 8:53 am
Re: the Moon
thanks, captain obviousjfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:43 pmDepends on what "should" means. Is the question is, what's fair and right? Or what should someone in the US' shoes do? Answers may not be the same.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:17 pm heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
what’s YOUR personal opinion on the situation?
i think i’m leaning towards Antarctica-status. otherwise, humans seem likely to do human-like things and fuck shit up (in numerous ways)
Have we fallen into a mesmerized state that makes us accept as inevitable that which is inferior or detrimental, as though having lost the will or the vision to demand that which is good?
Re: the Moon
I think we should leave the moon the fuck alone (not saying dont go there, but as far as resource extraction goes). Personal opinion.
Just Ledoux it
Re: the Moon
[edit to remove duplicate post]KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 3:07 pmthanks, captain obviousjfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:43 pmDepends on what "should" means. Is the question is, what's fair and right? Or what should someone in the US' shoes do? Answers may not be the same.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:17 pm heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
what’s YOUR personal opinion on the situation?
i think i’m leaning towards Antarctica-status. otherwise, humans seem likely to do human-like things and fuck shit up (in numerous ways)
Last edited by jfish26 on Mon Sep 25, 2023 6:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: the Moon
I’m not sure I’ve got a good personal opinion. I suppose you’re on the right path to look for existing analogs (Antarctica; maritime law; the body of international laws/rules governing near earth orbit) and improve on what’s there.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 3:07 pmthanks, captain obviousjfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:43 pmDepends on what "should" means. Is the question is, what's fair and right? Or what should someone in the US' shoes do? Answers may not be the same.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:17 pm heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
what’s YOUR personal opinion on the situation?
i think i’m leaning towards Antarctica-status. otherwise, humans seem likely to do human-like things and fuck shit up (in numerous ways)
I also suppose, based on what we’re seeing, that it would be beneficial for nations in some sort of consortium to agree to do things in coordination, and to not cause or permit their land, people or resources to be used for or in support of private moon exploration.
Re: the Moon
Well, obviously, the Moon belongs to us, because we’re America. Duh.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 2:17 pm heard over lunch that there are 250+ missions to the moon planned over the next decade, with at least the US and gina planning manned missions
the discussion that followed asked whether the moon should be granted some sort of conservation (like Antarctica), or be open for resource use/extraction
now, those making these decisions are almost exclusively the administrations of the US, russia, gina, and India
so, should resource extraction be allowed? if so, by whom and for whom? should the resources of the moon go to benefit all of humanity? are we comfortable with maybe a few dozen people, at most, making these decisions?
“First of all, AI is two letters. It’s kind of a fancy thing.” - Scary Smart Brilliant VP Kamala Harris
Re: the Moon
Hows bout we just let the moon be the moon and not try to exploit it whether privately, war of nations style, nor in some sort of collaborative rape and pillage effort?jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 6:14 pmI’m not sure I’ve got a good personal opinion. I suppose you’re on the right path to look for existing analogs (Antarctica; maritime law; the body of international laws/rules governing near earth orbit) and improve on what’s there.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 3:07 pmthanks, captain obvious
what’s YOUR personal opinion on the situation?
i think i’m leaning towards Antarctica-status. otherwise, humans seem likely to do human-like things and fuck shit up (in numerous ways)
I also suppose, based on what we’re seeing, that it would be beneficial for nations in some sort of consortium to agree to do things in coordination, and to not cause or permit their land, people or resources to be used for or in support of private moon exploration.
Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.
Just Ledoux it
Re: the Moon
For one, I think the technology gains we'd make in figuring it out are beneficial, perhaps even vital, to figuring out how to adapt here. To say nothing of learning how to potentially de-risk humanity by finding new places humanity can be.TDub wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 7:33 pmHows bout we just let the moon be the moon and not try to exploit it whether privately, war of nations style, nor in some sort of collaborative rape and pillage effort?jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 6:14 pmI’m not sure I’ve got a good personal opinion. I suppose you’re on the right path to look for existing analogs (Antarctica; maritime law; the body of international laws/rules governing near earth orbit) and improve on what’s there.KUTradition wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 3:07 pm
thanks, captain obvious
what’s YOUR personal opinion on the situation?
i think i’m leaning towards Antarctica-status. otherwise, humans seem likely to do human-like things and fuck shit up (in numerous ways)
I also suppose, based on what we’re seeing, that it would be beneficial for nations in some sort of consortium to agree to do things in coordination, and to not cause or permit their land, people or resources to be used for or in support of private moon exploration.
Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.
I also think it's inevitable, and so I support proactiveness in managing what it looks like.
Re: the Moon
I agree with the exploration aspect. But thats not how it's gonna go. We're gonna race there and figure out how to mine it and strip it of whatever it might hold.jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 8:37 pmFor one, I think the technology gains we'd make in figuring it out are beneficial, perhaps even vital, to figuring out how to adapt here. To say nothing of learning how to potentially de-risk humanity by finding new places humanity can be.TDub wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 7:33 pmHows bout we just let the moon be the moon and not try to exploit it whether privately, war of nations style, nor in some sort of collaborative rape and pillage effort?jfish26 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 25, 2023 6:14 pm
I’m not sure I’ve got a good personal opinion. I suppose you’re on the right path to look for existing analogs (Antarctica; maritime law; the body of international laws/rules governing near earth orbit) and improve on what’s there.
I also suppose, based on what we’re seeing, that it would be beneficial for nations in some sort of consortium to agree to do things in coordination, and to not cause or permit their land, people or resources to be used for or in support of private moon exploration.
Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.
I also think it's inevitable, and so I support proactiveness in managing what it looks like.
Figuring out the space travel portion is the main advantage I think. We aren't living in the moon though, no atmosphere. Unless you thinking some sort of biodome thing...in which case, thank goodness I was born and will die before that begins.
Just Ledoux it
Re: the Moon
I'm sure I've discussed before, but:
I'm all for the Moon-B-A.
it's like the NBA, but on the moon, so 1/6 the gravity...just imagine the dunks!
I'm all for the Moon-B-A.
it's like the NBA, but on the moon, so 1/6 the gravity...just imagine the dunks!