[carapat_virulat]

I can't take seriously any Mars project that sends people without robots paving our way there first. It sounds like romantic marketing with no real long-term expectation.

As the article says one of the main reasons is to inspire people, but the current world is structured in a way that tells a lot of people that they are out, they won't ever be part of society in a meaningful way, they'll get some money to stay alive and sort of make it through life, but they will never be meaningful members of a community.

So in this kind of atmosphere seems very difficult to convince people to participate in any kind of common project for all of us.

[marvin]

SpaceX hasn't made any public statements yet on how they are planning to send humans to Mars, but you can be pretty sure that robots will be a big part of it. Lots of SpaceX people are big fans of Mars Direct and similar plans.

[jmnicolas]

They didn't state that said humans were coming back too ;-)

[ycmbntrthrwaway]

I don't even feel like I take major part in IT industry. I just do my work, publish some research, contribute to some open-source projects etc. I may even get some great ideas at some point that will change something globally, but it is impossible to change the whole world for one men. Yet I follow HN and it is of value to me that other people create great things almost every day.

The same is true for Mars. I am almost sure I am not going into space in the next 50 years. Yet it is of value to me that someone goes into space or lives on Mars during my life. I would really like to see news from Mars, how people are doing there, what they invent to make their life better there etc.

Putting this into money is what Mars One [1] project proposes. They plan to raise money by putting their project on TV, because almost everyone would like to see how someone else is doing on Mars, even if not helping directly or participating in the project.

I think the original idea goes from chapter "Might have been" of the "Machinery of freedom" book [2]. There David Friedman proposed the same idea, just the goal is less ambitious: Mars is substituted for Moon.

[1] http://www.mars-one.com/

[2] http://daviddfriedman.com/The_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf

[cryoshon]

I agree entirely. I would venture to say that sending people without sending robots to pave the way is dangerous and irresponsible, as it denies whoever arrives to Mars a welcoming mat / basic resources which might help with survival.

For the best propaganda value (which I doubt Musk is concerned about at this moment)a member of the excluded economic caste should be sent abroad... but who knows how things will be different in 10 years.

[mrfusion]

I just don't think robots are that advanced. Look at he last darpa challenge. They could barely Open doors or climb ladders.

[croddin]

If you look at the 2004 Grand Challenge things looked pretty bad too, but driverless cars have made huge strides in the past ~10 years. If robots can do the same, they could be ready by then.

[Zigurd]

I don't know about that. Maybe it's more practical to just send powdered Soylent than to build a robotic farm. By "practical" I don't mean "cheaper" or "more sustainable." Money and rockets work. Robot farming on Mars, not known to be as reliable.