Did US Astronaut land on the moon for real?

[james_s]

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

[CatalinaWOW]

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

That is certainly a pessimistic view.  Whether you show the source as automation or unions most of the developed world has gone from essentially zero leisure time to a five day work week (or less) with an eight hour work day.  It only takes a couple of 'non working' hours to take care of chores, even though there are far more of them today (baths daily, not annually, clothes washed after one wearing instead of a few times a year and the like).  Just the microwave oven has reduced 'work' time by a lot for most people in industrialized societies.

Wealth concentration still exists, and has been increasing for the last two or three decades, but the overall trend is more murky.  Also the total wealth is clearly increased.  A lower class person a couple of hundred years ago would have owned one or two sets of clothes, if lucky a one or two room house, and some very rudimentary personal belongings. 

[cdev]

According to Oxfam, an NGO that tracks wealth and poverty, using data compiled by Swiss Re and others, wealth is becoming more concentrated at an exponentially increasing rate. So there really needs to be a discussion about how we will handle the end of work as we knew it in the past soon, or we really risk some terrible things happening. (Because the right to regulate is being taken away - for why, see the Trilemma of Globalization arguments- basically to protect the investments of a highly mobile global investor class. Many of whom no longer work.)

In the era of work and industrial activity, it became normal to associate wealth to work, but the fact is, the upper class are fairly contemptuous of work in many cases and go to great lengths to signal to one another that they don't need to work to remain wealthy. (For example, for a long time in the UK, only unemployed land owners could vote) Thorstein Veblen in his Theory of the Leisure Class drew a lot of parallels tying the conspicuous consumption activities of status conscious modern humans to older tribal societies. So the freeing of humanity from drudge work especially will be the realization of a long cherished dream.

Actually, if we go back to the pre-industrial era, especially the pre-agricultural era, the amount of time spent directly involved in work type activities (hunting and gathering) appears to have been in most cases less than today. A great deal of time was what we today would call socializing but it was actually activity to ensure the cohesion of the group and pass on needed information for survival to the next generation. Or so Ive read. Also, people who assume that post-industrial society will revert to a cottage industry model neglect the fact that in post-industrial society there won't be many jobs. So the opportunities for a comparable number of people to earn an income as existed in the past wont be there. Way back in the 1960s Hans Moravec had managed to convince John F. Kennedy to initiate a discussion on this coming era and its challenges but shortly after he agreed to do so he was assassinated. Lyndon F. Johnson, the president who replaced Kennedy, also promised to attempt to start a national discussion on this but the Vietnam War again prevented it from happening. And then after that the idea of having this discussion just seems to have vanished.

[cdev]

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

The reason is supply and demand. Classical economics predicts the value of work will be influenced by the supply of similar labor.

[apis]

A few years ago I read that the distribution of wealth was more unequal today than at the time of the french revolution. On the other hand, the only one who could afford a flushing toilet then was Marie Antoinette. During the middle ages a farmer would have spent more time doing manual labour at the farm just to produce the essentials to get through the year, but (s)he would also be eating better and more nutritious food and maybe would be happier and healthier? Of course, for a roman slave that wouldn't be the case.

I think it is clear the majority of people are getting poorer and poorer, but to some extent that is offset by (mainly) technological progress that makes things like flushing toilets and bread cheaper. Every now an then there is a little social progress as well, like abolition of slavery, human rights charters or public healthcare. Overall, as Steven Pinker says, many things are getting better, but at snail-speed. I wouldn't want to go back in time and live like a medieval farmer, I like my modern healthcare and conveniences too much, despite all its shortcomings. That doesn't mean there isn't any problems today, or things that couldn't be better.

There are robot factories already now, one produce furniture for Ikea for example. What happens when there is only one guy who owns all the robots that are making furniture? Or one gal that owns all the fully automated wheat farms? I'm not looking forward to the answer. Oligopolies seems to be getting commonplace already. I predict most people who read this will do it on a computer running either windows or mac-os with a processor from Intel (maybe AMD) for example. That is not a free market economy, more like Monoploy.

[cdev]

Free from the point of view of the corporations is freedom to buy your labor inputs wherever they are the cheapest. Thats one of the core things that has been changing since 1995. Non tariff barriers to trade in services are being eliminated very rapidly by global economic governance organizations who increasingly hold the real power. Turning the world into a giant mall where one can buy workers, policy, labor, women, and even human organs cheaper and cheaper.  But 'essential' things, like life saving drugs, housing, education, water etc. are becoming more and more expensive by design.

[dzseki]

Oligopolies seems to be getting commonplace already. I predict most people who read this will do it on a computer running either windows or mac-os with a processor from Intel (maybe AMD) for example. That is not a free market economy, more like Monoploy.

Or count how many semiconductor manufacturers are on market today and compare them to say of 30 years ago. The number of produced items has increased but it all comes from fewer vendors...

[coppice]

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

People worked far longer hours in the 19th century. If we lived like 19th century people we could be down to a pretty short work week by now. However, in the 19th century most people, in even the most developed countries, lived pretty horrible lives. Even as a child in the UK I was bloody cold for a lot of the winter, because it was financially impractical for most people to heat more than a small area of their homes. Life was still pretty basic in many ways. Until the internet meant that lots of us are never really off work, the 35 to 40 hour work week and several weeks vacation per year was giving lots of us a reasonable balance between work hours and the quality of life we can get from them.

[dzseki]

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

People worked far longer hours in the 19th century. If we lived like 19th century people we could be down to a pretty short work week by now. However, in the 19th century most people, in even the most developed countries, lived pretty horrible lives. Even as a child in the UK I was bloody cold for a lot of the winter, because it was financially impractical for most people to heat more than a small area of their homes. Life was still pretty basic in many ways. Until the internet meant that lots of us are never really off work, the 35 to 40 hour work week and several weeks vacation per year was giving lots of us a reasonable balance between work hours and the quality of life we can get from them.

Of course we are going more forward than backward in most ways, but the fact the wealth of the wealthiests is ever growing leaving things to further improve still...

[cdev]

There still seem to be residual expectations from the 1900s that things will get better despite economic shifts occurring which are constantly reacalibrating everything in the other direction. In particular the WTO Ministerial every two years is designed to effectuate progressive liberalization which will result in huge efficiency gains in developed countries. Think NAFTA but for the rest of the jobs.

Throughout history, automation has replaced working class people and shifted more of the income to the people who develop and own the machines. It has never really delivered on the promised increased leisure time, it just results in a further concentration of wealth amongst the few at the top. I wouldn't expect that to change to any significant degree going forward.

People worked far longer hours in the 19th century. If we lived like 19th century people we could be down to a pretty short work week by now. However, in the 19th century most people, in even the most developed countries, lived pretty horrible lives. Even as a child in the UK I was bloody cold for a lot of the winter, because it was financially impractical for most people to heat more than a small area of their homes. Life was still pretty basic in many ways. Until the internet meant that lots of us are never really off work, the 35 to 40 hour work week and several weeks vacation per year was giving lots of us a reasonable balance between work hours and the quality of life we can get from them.

Of course we are going more forward than backward in most ways, but the fact the wealth of the wealthiests is ever growing leaving things to further improve still...

[james_s]

Things do largely get better overall, but not everything does. Automation has taken over countless jobs but rather than the person who formerly did that job sitting back and enjoying themselves while the machine does the work for them, they are out of a job and the owner of the company pockets what used to be their paycheck. Manufacturing in most first world nations has been gutted, what is next? Automation is effective because it allows many fewer but more highly skilled people to replace a large workforce of unskilled and semi-skilled workers. It's a double edged sword, the reduced cost of goods allows us to have more "stuff" but it is progressively harder to make a good living so the cost of necessities like housing rise.

Goods are cheaper because it requires far fewer man hours to produce a given gadget, but that also means a lot fewer paychecks. Everyone has got to make a living somehow.

[cdev]

I can answer that question. Services are the other 80% of the economy. The two were supposed to be gutted together back in the 90s but services got hung up in negotiations between the various groups that all wanted their cut. Every two years, they meet, the Uruguay Round, Seattle, the Cancun talks, Doha, Hong Kong, Bali, Geneva in between, again and again, Nairobi and most recently Buenos Aires. They need international involvement (multilateralism) they claim that legitimates the end run around democracy! I don't think so. But read it for yourself! (See "Golden Straightjacket" "Globalization Trilemma" on places like the WEForum site (the Davos people) and so on) Now the latest story is that it helps poor people (Really, I couldn't make this up!) to prop up the people who oppress them the most. And find jobs for their children. Especially if they don't pay!? The "poor" countries want the jobs and other concessions in exchange for their companies to broker in exchange for cooperation in their con game against the mutually resented soon to be former middle class. It's their entitlement!

Automation would have taken ten or twenty more years to decimate the number of jobs that services liberalization can probably offshore or onshore in just two or three.

Things do largely get better overall, but not everything does. Automation has taken over countless jobs but rather than the person who formerly did that job sitting back and enjoying themselves while the machine does the work for them, they are out of a job and the owner of the company pockets what used to be their paycheck. Manufacturing in most first world nations has been gutted, what is next?

Services. Of course under global value chains it makes no sense to do anything expensive in the developed countries that can be done for less in the two dollar a day or less countries. Thats their new middle class. But of course only an idiot would delude themselves into thinking that will create any kind of other middle class anywhere else. But that is the totally debunked argument that they still repeat. All knowing its total hogwash. They are literally following the killing the goose that laid the golden egg fable as if they were in a trance. Groupthink has captured their common sense clean away.

If you look at history its just full of really huge disasters where people thought some ideologically obsessed ruling entity that had other priorities was going to help them and that it wouldn't let things just fall apart, but it did. Changing so many things all at once like they are doing, behind everybody's backs, basically changing the entire world's government in order to make money everything instead of not everything, is a mistake. We need some common sense. But we don't have any honesty from any of these entities, its not in their vocabulary.

[coppercone2]

Just give customers options machines cant handle and need labor to change. Everyone is gonna get bored of how shit looks and works with hypermass production.

If every day is exactly the same you will go crazy.

Unless your some thumping commie you wanna be a little different


Also tell me a mass produced bread you enjoy eating? Its a bandaid for logistical problems and the poverty gap. Everyone would be eating artisan stuff if they could. You eat fucking wonderbread and cans because the world is too fucked up to get you a reasonably conveniant bakery.

That kind of shit happens because your like fucking god damn molex crimpers are so expensive screw it im gonna eat beans out of a can for a month.

Mass production also results in hillarious situations when it comes to form and function.

Also not enough engineers to occupy the machines with complex low production jobs.

[nick_d]

In free-market capitalism, the public votes every day as to which entrepreneurs should control the stock of capital. An entrepreneur who does not meet the public's needs, soon has to go out of business. An entrepreneur who gives the public what they wants becomes wealthy and can reinvest.

As such, a divide between rich and poor can only exist to the extent that one entrepreneur better predicts the needs of the consumers over a longer period than another. (One who works a 9-5 job is an entrepreneur by this definition but has only one customer, restricting his/her ability to profit).

The reason why a large and growing divide between rich and poor exists currently, is that we do not have free-market capitalism. Instead, every aspect of the economy is controlled and regulated. Because of the phenomenon of regulatory capture, it is normal practice for the market leaders in a particular industry to cause large amounts of choking legislation to be produced, which is costly to comply with and restricts new entrants to those who have substantial capital backing.

Or in a simpler case consider professional licensing, doctors, lawyers and so on... it's the same thing. Basically the reason doctors and lawyers can virtually print money is that the supply of these essential services is sharply restricted. Not free-market.

I should be allowed to consult anybody I want for medications or surgery, and I should be allowed to have anybody I want argue my case in a Court. Charlatans may remain in business for a while, but if somebody doesn't do their due diligence, it's basically their own responsibility. I don't need Government to protect me by providing a "minimum" standard of service that I cannot afford.

Open up the free market to genuine competition, and see the gap between wealth and poor close up within years or decades. It's that simple.

Nick

[Cnoob]

Watch this video of why Russia didn't land on the Moon



Penguins and Polar Bears live in different hemispheres.

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

Is this true?
What's for all this silly stuff?
Why are all these NASA guys and gals such weirdos?
Why would NASA lie?

[taydin]

That video is just plain FUD! The technology to put an object into earth orbit is already there. Hell, it was there for the past 60 years! If this video is casting doubt in some people, then they might as well doubt the presence of satellites in orbit! But then, how do we watch live TV across continents? How does GPS work? How about satellite phones? But I'm sure the guys making this video have an explanation for those, too, just like the flat earthers

[taydin]

Why are all these NASA guys and gals such weirdos?

Because they were fascinated by science, technology, and space since they were kids. And they have put so much time into the study and learning of science, their social skills didn't develop as well as their peers that were socializing in their spare times.

Why would NASA lie?

NASA doesn't have any reason to lie about anything. Look at the huge building in Arlington, VA that has 5 edges if you want to see chronic liars

[TheNewLab]

Yup, you're a Flatearther. Time to take a Flatearth Cruise the the edge of earth and prove it is flat by falling off LOL, just kidding.

We may think it was too easy for man to go into space and just land on the moon. That is not so. There setbacks and disasters are just not spoken about

for your enjoyment, is a Youtube that shows how difficult it was to make a reliable rocket to clear earth's orbit


Thank Fabio Baccaglioni for this series.

[TheNewLab]

Perhaps you are very stupid?

You can't imagine how many mistakes I did in the past. Opening a therad like this was the last one. 

Hmm. So you CAN learn? So all is not lost!

I think Antarctica is fake. How can it be cold there if the sun shines during the day? It's warm here at the same time!

Actually most of Antarctica is in darkness for 24 hours per day, when it's warm in Canada.

So, that's why polar bears don't eat penguins. They can't find them in the dark. 

Groan.  Good grief, now this thread really does need to be locked.

LOL, LOL, LOL!

Zucca has one really good point.
What books are there to read that tell the story of space and humanities effort to get out there?
How about if we build a list of great reads?
...and I cannot think of a single title, I just have the name Richard Feynman stuck in my head..

[GeorgeOfTheJungle]

My question is, 1) Does NASA really make fake PR/propaganda videos in which they pretend to be in the ISS but aren't? 2) If so, why?

[daqq]

My question is, 1) Does NASA really make fake PR/propaganda videos in which they pretend to be in the ISS but aren't? 2) If so, why?

[cdev]

Astronauts are real, I used to work with one, well, in the next building over from one. And she used to go running a couple times a week with one of my co workers, they were old friends from college.

I also used to see them at lunch and in the gym. And they do have all sorts of machines to simulate various aspects of space.

[cdev]

The Blue Earth, its an IMAX film with a soundtrack by Brian Eno.