256
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Apr 2026
256 points (100.0% liked)
News
37131 readers
2202 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I have never had so little interest in a space mission. This seems to be without any real scientific goals, and being an American political project since NASA is now micromanaged by the White house, makes this seem about as irrelevant as it can possibly be.
Edit:
Kind of uplifting that people here have more optimism than me, but I'm sorry I simply can't share your optimism about an agency that has been politicized and redesigned to promote private enterprise taking over space exploration. I hope your naivete will not be exploited. Except actually I don't really have any hope of that.
I agree I dont see the reason for the hype.
I sure would like to go to the moon, maybe, but I wouldnt claim that my being there was special or impactful to the world other than I had a very privileged experience.
Someone mentioned to me that going to the moon is like the greatest thing we've ever done. I just dont think so. And it seems the answers I get to the question of why is it good is never very clear.
People seem to indicate something along the lines of
People going into space is a departure from Earth. And it was so hard. And it still is hard. All the calculations that must be accurate, all the technology, the difficulty of zero gravity on the body.....we can spread humanity into the stars....(we are no were near that) think about the science (what about it?)
Things being difficult does not equal greatness or positive impact.
The thing that is good for sure, is technology innovation that impacts other areas than space.
Another thing that may be good is, having a moon colony. (There is a plan) But I havent looked into Artemis so much to see how much this trip is doing to forward that plan, if any.
Satellites great and all that. More knowledge about the moon and space great-but how much is the human needed, unless establishing a colony, like 80% of the good things about going to the moon you dont need people, unmanned.
John Snow arguably had more positive impact on humanity than all the moon efforts combined.
Its true that I am also not super into space exploration, so Im sure I lack a lot of knowledge but this is my opinion now.
Actually I am into space exploration, when it has a scientific purpose, to make us understand the universe better.
I also think the first time NASA put a man on the moon was an achievement, and there were scientific discoveries because of it too.
Bit very obviously doing the same again, can never have the same impact. The money used on this moon trip could have had way bigger scientific impact. This moon trip is a PR stunt, and very little more than that.
A lot of the Apollo program's control and communications were analog. As you would expect, a lot of that has been switched to digital for the Artemis program. It's a completely different beast. That requires extensive testing in real world conditions.
The instruments used to measure the moon (and humans after a moon journey) were not as advanced in the 70s as they are now. A lot of data needs to be recollected and reexamined.
Just like a muscle that isn't flexed, institutional and scientific knowledge is lost if not invoked over time. For example, the technique to make flexible fountain pen nibs has been lost since pre-WW2. Modern fountain pen flex nibs that cost 1k USD to produce are still significantly worse. NASA has been bleeding knowledge for 50+ years. A lot of things now have to be done from scratch.
There are entire generations of aerospace PhDs that never got to use their knowledge, and may not pass on that knowledge if interest in Space exploration keeps dwindling. To them, this has nothing to do with politics. It's more impressive that they managed to deliver with such a tight budget.
The idea of "putting money towards the biggest scientific impact" is BS. All knowledge is important. We fund history, archeology, sociology (and often not enough) because of this principle. This is why there are researcher unions at universities: you mess with one departments funding, you mess with all our funding.
If the only "scientific discoveries" you can see are the ones literally in front of you, you are not cut out for academic research.