Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by palata 82 days ago
> Are you arguing the Moon programs didn’t increase American engagement in STEM?

Nope. You are arguing that without a space program, people don't go into STEM and instead become "bureaucrats or financiers". I am saying that this is preposterous.

> We’re willing, as a society, to spend big on the Moon.

No. Society doesn't have a say in how that money is being spent, that's my original point.
1 comments
JumpCrisscross 82 days ago
> You are arguing that without a space program, people don't go into STEM and instead become "bureaucrats or financiers"

I never used such hyperbole. I’m arguing fewer people go into STEM. And the people who do cannot be assumed to work on the projects that matter to you.

> Society doesn't have a say in how that money is being spent

Of course we do. Space programmes are popular. That’s why they get funded.

link
palata 82 days ago
> And the people who do cannot be assumed to work on the projects that matter to you.

That's the case with or without a space program that sends humans to space for the sake of sending humans to space.

> Space programmes are popular. That’s why they get funded.

Space programs are popular because they are cool. The people don't get to vote the budgets, though. Because DOGE did not cut the budget of the space programs does not mean that "society is willing to spend big on the Moon". At all.

link
JumpCrisscross 82 days ago
> Because DOGE did not cut the budget of the space programs

DOGE absolutely tried to gut Artemis [1]. The popularity is part of what saved it. (Weirdly myopic metric for what is and isn’t popular? Since when did DOGE become arbiters of anything.)

[1] https://www.npr.org/2025/02/19/g-s1-49451/artemis-moon-nasa-...

link
palata 82 days ago
> Weirdly myopic metric for what is and isn’t popular? Since when did DOGE become arbiters of anything.

Where did I imply that? I said that DOGE not doing something did NOT imply something. Too many negations for you, maybe?

link