Bitcoin Forum

So, how many of you would donate bitcoin on a regular basis to sustain a space agency?

/r/equesting further details

Yeah, depends on the goals of the Space Program.

Explore mars. Build space stations. Build self replicating space probes. The usual.

I might donate, depending on what they want to do and how they want to achieve it.

You might want to hint these people:

http://www.marssociety.org/

It depends.  I'd consider strongly supporting a group like Team FredNet (http://www.frednet.com/) if they were to start taking donations.  For those not aware of this group, it is one of the teams of the Google Lunar X-Prize competition that uses mostly volunteers and "open source design" principles to build a vehicle that they are hoping will land on the Moon to win a multi-million dollar prize if they can get there first.  There are a few other groups like Copenhagen Suborbitals (http://www.copenhagensuborbitals.com/) that also are very much deserving of financial support and can certainly use some help... where the money would be relatively well spent and have some huge payback.

In terms of dumping money into the fiscal black holes called national space agencies, I'd just as soon start donating money directly to Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, or Donald Trump.  RKK Energia is making a profit on its own without Russian taxpayers having to foot most of the bill, so I'm curious what other agency is being talked about here?  Donating to NASA?  Fat chance.  I'd rather see that agency disbanded completely as it is a total waste of tax dollars to keep that agency going at the moment.  It may have been useful to America at one time, but it isn't any more.

I too would donate to an organization if it's open enough so that you know what they do with the donations, but probably not to national space agencies. Some of my tax money already goes to them. However, if given the opportunity, I would vote for more of my tax money to go to research and exploration.

As of now, I believe the best I can help space exploration is to earn enough money to book a flight on Virgin Galactic.

No. But I would invest. Space exploration can and should be profitable. However, I might make exceptions for academic ventures.

For some of us, having all of humanity on one planet is a basic problem; enough to spend a few dollars or bitcoins from time to time anyway.

Anyway, it's interesting how you see space programs in the same category as sports. They do produce pratical results and progress in everyday life. See for example http://curiosity.discovery.com/topic/transportation-science/ten-nasa-inventions.htm but there is more.

Lol, socialists on Bitcoin forums? :D

We would still live in caves if we cared only for basic human needs.


@Topic

Maybe in a future.

Space travel is never going to be a solution to overpopulation, it would cost way too much to massively send people away.
However, it would be a solution to anything that could wipe out humanity on Earth (nuclear war, big asteroid crash, who knows). As of today, all of humanity is on Earth, and if something happens to Earth, humanity disappears. If we had colonies elsewhere, at least the species would have a chance to survive.


But a space program is not leisure, it's research. It might not save one sick child today, but it will surely benefit many children, sick or not, in the future. We can't stop doing research because there are sick people, or we won't ever do research. I'm not saying we should spend all of our research money on space programs, but they're part of it and they do give practical results. So yes, I would donate to a space program, because not all of my money goes to helping people directly.

(As a matter of fact, I do give money to Doctors Without Borders. But it's a very small part of my salary, much less than what I spend in books or games, so I don't take any pride in it; just saying one can decide to care about both short and long term issues.)

Overpopulation is NOT A PROBLEM. The earth can potentially support trillion more human beings. Energy IS the problem. We need to be more efficient in our use of energy and as well find plentiful energy source. This is so that we can convert all those potential energy into something that can support the human race. Remember, the earth receive more energy from the sun in one hour than our entire civilization use in one year!

Medicine cannot be solved by mere throwing money at problem. It just need to be organized as an efficient enterprise. That mean, medicine should be mass-produced and as well become more effective over time. Imagine hundred of heart surgeon performing hundred of operation each day! You get more quality and quantity at the same time. Imagine all the hospitals in the world employing the little simple thing called CHECKLISTS.

Space travel IS a research program. And with all research program, we don't shit how we're going to benefit from it. The ROI however, could be astronomically huge. Beside, if you're interested in the survival of our species, it can only be a good thing.

Money is not the problem, but rather how medicine is organized. Here are some of the problems:

1. Insurance should NOT be used for daily health care! It should only be used in EMERGENCY!  You should be able to pay out of your own pocket. Insurance is supposed to incentivize preventive medicine, but it's doesn't! Insurance is broken.

2. Medical guild. Enough said.

3. Regulations that impose high cost on medicine, innovation, etc.

4. Patents. Get rid of them.

5. Proven reform ignored. The fraking checklist? Where are the checklist in intensive care units? Where are my heart surgery factory?

All these factors contribute to poor incentive, inefficiency, and lives LOST. Remember folks, there's alway be scarce resources. These things need to be take care of by the market if you want to MAXIMIZE life saving.

Well, it is true until we decide to collectively act to supress all basic life issues on Earth. Which is not going to happen any time soon. So until then, I would advise anyone with money to spend to not put all his eggs in the same basket and fund research now.

Even if I agree overpopulation isn't going to be a problem for some time, a trillion human people is a bit much. I don't know what the maximum size of the population is, but anyway, we do live in a closed system, with a limited capacity. The only way we're going to escape overpopulation is by having less children.

The primary problem with starving humans is that a lot of culture can't support a market society, or that there is some kind of wars going on, and so forth. We could potentially turn the great Sahara desert into a blooming breadbasket for the rest of humanity if those African society got their act together(or we stop actively harming them with our well intentioned aid)

The ocean is also vastly unused. We might be able to support a bigger population if we can utilize that.

Now, overpopulation isn't so much of a worry anymore. Humans seem to be voluntary having less humans as they get wealthier.

Oh. one more thing... space = space, not suborbital orbits. Minimum moon distance.

If I behaved the same way regarding siblings and unknown humans, then sure, I would spend 80% on my salary on helping NGOs. I wonder how many people do that. But your analogy works for any kind of research, not just space programs. I mean, why invent televisions or the internet while people are dying ? Why fund medical research on Alzeihmer's while children die of AIDS long before they can develop that disease ?


From which we can conclude a very simple fact of life: people don't agree, and will never agree, on what to fund with their money.
Whatever your big project might be, as soon as you ask for money, some people will come and say their big project is more urgent. Or more important. Or more fun. Hoping to decide on a single great goal is unrealistic, and might be counter-productive if you're waiting for that agreement before doing anything.


Your conviction that nothing bad can happen to Earth is heartwarming :)

Research, for what they are, have an unknown ROI value. We don't know if they will bring us the cure for cancer, or help us save the entire specie from asteroid annihilation. Space exploration involves an innumerable amount of technology that it would be hard to imagine that they would have no wide application for life on earth. So in conclusion, space exploration will probably benefit humanity in many indirect ways...

Still, asteroid annihilation is still a very real threat. It might happens now, or a thousand years from now. At the very least, we should prepare for that kind of possibility.

(Beside, if we can mine those asteroid, earth would be like filthy rich since the price of many commodity will drop to the floor)

Not true. My point was that if we invest more in researches and technology, we can for example invent better way to produce food or clear water. Second thing is that sending money to Africa or poor countries is just pointless. We are already sending them tons of money and the money is wasted or spent on weapons. It makes sense when you give money to 1 person or a family. But if you give it to the whole country you're destroying it.

Sorry for off-topic and my english :)

Get rid of all militaries and wars first. Otherwise well just end up using space technology to threaten each other.

This is not a straw-man, I'm saying your analogy is too vague and can be applied to obviously wrong situations, therefore it is a bad analogy. A straw-man would be pretending that you actually defend those ridiculous positions.

Most of us have much more disposable income than what we spend on funding NGOs.


The funding for space research is much lower than the funding for more pragmatic research; this does indicate some kind of priority choice at one point. You're saying that you believe that studying Uranus has 0 urgency until we fixed urgent problems on Earth, which is a bit different.


My point is that, by doing that, one ensure that we will never know anything about Uranus (is there a joke somewhere here ?) because we will never meet the basic needs for everyone.

A lot of things would never have been discovered if there was no fundamental research. The problem with research is that you can't know in advance what path will be fruitful. Space programs that you would never have approved gave us GPS, improvements in hydroponics farms, in aviation safety, in firefighters breathing systems, as well as a demining device, the cochloear implant, sonar body imaging, nuclear magnetic resonance and other medical imaging technologies. Was it worthless ?

The resource spent on establishing market societies is much different than the resources spent on space exploration.

Market societies don't need resources as so much as ideas. They certainty don't need engineers as much as badass commandos dedicated to enforcing the rule of law. Those engineers would be better spent on space exploration & colonization or some other technical concerns. You're not going to throw astronomers and physicists at problems outside of their expertise do you?

Beside, once a market society takes off, like in Signapore and South Korea, EVERYTHING will change within one generation. Poverty problem solved. Of course, it's not actually that easy.

In any case, this thread is about funding space exploration project VOLUNTARY. Not through taxes and theft, but through genuine donation from the heart. We're trying to find extraterrestial life, research options for long-term survival of humanity, and so on.

These projects are very long-term but they're also very important. At least some kind of funding goes into it, no?

FOR THE LOVE OF ERIS, we already have those charities. But they aren't doing a damn thing about political instabilities and corruption. If they did, than the whole of Africa would be rising out of poverty within a generation.

(Actually they kinda are, with the advent of cheap smartphone and new technologies)

I'm guessing that this would be a very very very small space agency...possibly only serving mice or mini-robots/computers?  :P  Keep in mind the entire value of all bitcoins in existence is only on the order of a million dollars.

If you even call rhetorical questions strawmen, this is my cue to stop debating. But I'm glad to see that you agree with the benefits of space research.

Yes, let coerce individuals at gunpoint to spend money on medical research projects for the GOOD of humanity. That sound nice doesn't it.

But of course, all those things ARE UNSEEN. We don't know what kind of technology might emerge if the US doesn't "invent" the internet, which by the way, required entrepreneurs to make the internet USEFUL.


With all due respect, they spend their OWN MONEY. You might hate me for spending my money on manga, good science fiction shows, and so on. But so what? All I am arguing is that the space program needs some modicum of funding. This is not about some nebulous "researching Uranus" that have little impact on our lives.

This is about knowledge, the fate of humanity as a whole, and the ability to control our own destiny.

Asteroid impact resulting in extinction level event is a very low probability but it doesn't mean it won't happen. There WILL BE smaller asteroid that will cause devastating damage to cities. It may happen once in a century. It may happen once in a thousand years. But there will be TONS of lives lost ESPECIALLY if it hit a city.



No, stop wasting money on government! Stop voting! And stop believing that you're not in control of your own government, because technically YOU ARE.

You can vote. You can throw out elected officials. You believe in this fairy tale called Democracy Make Good Government(TM).

This is about a charity operated space agency, not let secretly funnel money to some corporations charity.

And for the record, the research are meant to benefit humanity, not Keep the Benefit Away From EVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIL Corporation motive.

Keep cool, kiba, he never said anything about forbidding your spending on space research, he just disapproved :)

I do benefit from every invention I mentionned, except the demining device. Therefore I do see an incentive to push for more research, even without taking into account my belief that space is worthy by itself.

(sorry for not answering fully, posting from a phone)

No, that's absolutely a bunch of bull, as disproved by at least 100,000 members in the Planetary Society.

Some of us think space is important and we choose to say so with our money.

This went off topic but, kiba, do you have something specific in mind for funding a space program   with bitcoins ?

Not really. It was just a hypothetical question.

There are several programs that might be useful:

1. Figure out low-cost method of clearing space junks in LEO. If possible, this can be spinned off as a company ala Mozilla Corporation. The money it make from clearing LEO could be used to fund other space exploration & colonization projects.

2. Figure out how to build a self-replicating autonomous space station. This could paves the way for self-maintaining space colony.

3. Mass-produced space probes. Let face it, scientific missions should be made cheap.

Corporations ARE creature of the state. So they're made that "way". Doesn't mean it will operate the same for a bitcoin corporations or future corporations.

We want cheap method of exploration and colonization not corporation hogging on charities. If the charity needs to do so, one of their mission will be to create more cost-effective way of exploring space.

Otherwise corporations will be left to their own device in making it cost effective for us to explore and colonize space.

Very interesting! Space program should be open source for public.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=34922.0

 Space program is up!