the Moon

[KUTradition]

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?

[jfish26]

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?

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]

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?

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.

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)

[TDub]

I think we should leave the moon the fuck alone (not saying dont go there, but as far as resource extraction goes). Personal opinion.

[jfish26]

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?

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.

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)

[edit to remove duplicate post]

[jfish26]

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?

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.

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’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.

[JKLivin]

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?

Well, obviously, the Moon belongs to us, because we’re America. Duh.

[TDub]

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.

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’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.

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?


Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.

[jfish26]

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’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.

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?


Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.

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.

I also think it's inevitable, and so I support proactiveness in managing what it looks like.

[TDub]

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.

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?


Unless, of course, it's made of cheese. In which case, I say bring that shit home.

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.

I also think it's inevitable, and so I support proactiveness in managing what it looks like.

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.

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.

[ousdahl]

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!