The Blue Board

Discussing technology in 2013 is generally split between people who's minds clicked over and they now, to some extent, "get" exponential and global thinking. For however long man has existed our minds have observed and therefore operated on linear/local and now that is shifting. It may take three more generations before everyone "gets" global/exponential.

I actually remember when I was 9 years old my dad was explaining and issue to me and he said, "if a jar is filled with an entity that replicates itself individually every second how long is it before the jar is completely full". I said it would be one second before. He then asked how long before the jar is totally full would be people be concerned but still comfortable? I said likely 2 seconds before when the jar is only 1/4th full. That was when my mind shifted and I understood global/exponential.

Most people I know think in 10 years their "phone" will still be a box they keep in their pocket. It's not that they are dumb, their mind just doesnt get it.

I would definitely shop there.

I think there's room for both. Some missions interest private companies more than they do NASA (e.g. space mining for minerals), while others interest NASA more than private companies (e.g. deep space exploration, lunar trips etc.). No reason both can't co-exist.

NASA shouldn't be privatized though, if that's want you meant.

If I was the Prez I'd push for massive drawbacks on defense spending, demanding that the military streamline their spending procedures which as of now make as much sense as a screen door on a submarine. Then 4-5 billion of that would go to NASA and 2-3 Billion would go to 5-6 major companies in grants/0 interest loans/etc.

SpaceX, Lockheed Martin, Whoever leaps out in front of 3D printing, etc.

In terms of energy and carbon issues I truly believe by 2025 we will have truly scalable, outstanding solar as well as fully functioning fourth generation nuclear. Coupled with the conservation of the Enernet and we will be good to go.

you really wouldn't need massive military budget cuts to divert 23 billion.

I used to be all for cuts to the military, but in today's economic climate I don't think it wise. If and when shit ever hits the fan, the ultimate truth is might. Might can take what it needs and wants. May not be wise to sacrifice American might.

the problem with cost comparisons. Is that our shit costs more than other countries shit. Labor costs are higher, profit margin's for industry are higher, etc...

Military spending has an enormous room for improvements at every level though. We should be getting more proverbial bang for our buck.

When I was in the Army, I remember having to go shoot off a bunch of ammo and shit at the end of the fiscal year, just so the battalion would get the same money to spend on it the next year. Ridiculous.

We currently spend 714 billion a year on defense. That number needs to get closer to 400 ASAP.

Wow...

It definitely needs to be measured and meted out. But that should be a 15 year goal is to reduce our defense budget by that much. JMO.

I could see 15 years. Shifting $20B per year would be significant, but manageable.