Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Feeds
105363 items (97572 unread) in 19 feeds
Friends
(1021 unread)
-
2 Star
(84 unread)
-
John Carrino
(12 unread)
-
Comments for Josh the Outspoken
(296 unread)
-
Josh (34 unread)
-
Planet Matt
(595 unread)
Build
(68091 unread)
-
MAKE Magazine
(20292 unread)
-
Instructables.com
(35006 unread)
-
Hack A Day
(5017 unread)
-
Toolmonger
(7776 unread)
Heads
(716 unread)
-
Exploration Through Example
-
Paul Graham: Unofficial RSS Feed (113 unread)
-
Stevey's Blog Rants
(34 unread)
-
Joel on Software (207 unread)
-
Gibson Blog
(239 unread)
-
Adventures in Bloggery (123 unread)
News
(27537 unread)
-
Slashdot (25203 unread)
-
Economist.com Global Agenda (1412 unread)
-
Ruby Inside
(922 unread)
fun
(207 unread)
-
Templar, Arizona
(207 unread)
Slashdot
-
The Upside of the NASA Budget
Posted: February 2nd, 2010, 11:13am MST by Soulskill
teeks99 writes "There are a lot of articles circulating about the new changes to the NASA budget, but this one goes into some of the details. From what I'm seeing, it looks great — cutting off the big, expensive, over-budget stuff and allowing a whole bunch of important and revolutionary programs to get going: commercial space transportation; keeping the ISS going (now that we've finally got it up and running); working on orbital propellant storage (so someday we can go off to the far flung places); automated rendezvous and docking (allowing multiple, smaller launches, which then form into one large spacecraft in orbit). Quoting: 'NASA is out of the business of putting people into low-earth orbit, and doesn't see getting back in to it. The Agency now sees its role as doing interesting things with people once they get there, hence its emphasis on in-orbit construction, heavy lift capabilities, and resource harvesting hardware. Given budgetary constraints and the real issues with the Constellation program, none of that is necessarily unreasonable. '"