News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by WalterBright on Thursday February 17, 2022 @07:02PM (#30380513)
> And JWST took 20 years to develop.

Likely a great deal of that was trying to optimize it for weight. Also, it was a government program - not known for cost or time efficiency.

Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by ClumsyPilot on Thursday February 17, 2022 @10:18PM (#30381769)
When did private business pay for scientific instruments, like particle colliders and gravity enterferometers?
Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by codewench on Friday February 18, 2022 @07:10PM (#30392981)
Isn't that literally every major university ever?
Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by WalterBright on Friday February 18, 2022 @12:08AM (#30382332)
They did before the government got involved in it.

But if you want to spend $23 billion for a collider, you're probably going to need to forcibly take the money to do it. Of course, it's worth it if it's someone else's money.

Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by jmyeet on Thursday February 17, 2022 @07:25PM (#30380723)
Are you imaginging a JWST or similar telescope that isn't a government program?
Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by WalterBright on Thursday February 17, 2022 @11:52PM (#30382258)
Why not? Capitalism has a record of funding a lot of scientific expeditions, for example.

Let's say Microsoft wanted to generate goodwill in the scientific community? What could be better than funding a space telescope?

Re:SpaceX’s monstrous, dirt-cheap Starship may transform spa... by betwixthewires on Friday February 18, 2022 @01:21AM (#30382684)
Microsoft has had many incidents in which generation of goodwill would've been very valuable, so where's the Microsoft space telescope?

Goodwill isn't going to cut it. There needs to be a tangible incentive.