We will never reproduce the experience of 10 year old me watching the moon landing with my dad. It's all just egos and entertainment now.
We will never reproduce the experience of 10 year old me watching the moon landing with my dad. It's all just egos and entertainment now.
Also, you say "It's all just egos and entertainment now." What do you think it was in 1969? Is "beat the Russians" somehow a more noble goal than "sell a product"?
Odd that.
But, NASA is predominately displayed on all of the original moonshot crafts. That's an advertisement for that organization. . .
And, I'm 100% sure ego had nearly everything to do with the original space race. Beating the Russians and what-not. That seems, in hindsight, to be very ego driven?
All the other stuff people say about parenting can be reproduced via service or volunteering or something else. But that experience absolutely is unique.
Magic is real. The world is wild and exciting, and it's all there for that kid. It's amazing to watch and be a part of.
So, while you can never go back to being at 10 year old boy, you absolutely can get a taste of what that's like via adoption or having your own. In my opinion, that is.
I see what you did there, heh!
Just here to both support and counter this a bit. Kids are absolutely a great way to see joy in the world again!
... but they don't have to be yours. I've supervised those for my peers, played temporary dad, all of it.
Sure, it's time-boxed, but that may be the goal. Trading seeing "everything" new, for "plenty"
“Besides NASA’s tech and navigation experiments, Intuitive Machines sold space on the lander to Columbia Sportswear to fly its newest insulating jacket fabric; sculptor Jeff Koons for 125 mini moon figurines; and Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University for a set of cameras to capture pictures of the descending lander.”
https://apnews.com/article/moon-landing-private-company-intu...
We are truly spreading the worst of humanity into the cosmos. Good job it's only us that appear able to witness it.
Defraying costs by using ads is a strawman. If you can't afford to do something, maybe don't do it. If you really, really want to do it, maybe ask yourself if the world genuinely needs what you're doing. If it does, find a way. If the only way you can do it is by selling advertising, you've taken as mis-step.
Media & journalism have been underpinned by advertising for over a century. Tons of educational and informative services are available to the public for free because of advertising. Sponsorship has built art galleries, hospital wings, research centers, etc.
In this case, there's a relatively innocuous logo on a robotic lander that is 230k miles away on a desolate rock. It's not like this is a billboard in a nature preserve.
> billboard in a nature preserve
Where's the line? Why shouldn't we put billboards in nature preserves?
Clearly they can afford to do what they just did.
Oh, you don't like how they raised money? Good, pay attention to something else, they aren't doing things for your approval.
They didn't do it for approval, but they sure as shit didn't ask for approval either.
And I'd like to see a breakdown of exactly how much the ad revenue contributed to payload delivery.