NASA Seeks Geniuses and Visionaries 246
Dotnaught writes "The NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts has put out a call for 'revolutionary ideas to advance the Vision for Space Exploration.' Would-be visionaries are invited to submit their ideas by February 13, 2006, as explained in this Call for Proposals. Phase 1 grants range from $50K to $75K. Phase 2 grants go up to $400K. Sample grand visions include how to create a 'self-sustaining, human presence throughout the solar system' and 'truly autonomous robotic operations for exploration and habitation.'" If any Slash users end up with the grants, we call dibs on interviews.
My idea (Score:4, Funny)
Re:My idea (Score:4, Informative)
That's a popular meme spread by the likes of Rush Limbaugh, but the truth is the Columbia Accident Investigation Board found that the section of foam that broke off and damaged Columbia had been made with freon. [mediamatters.org]
This idea that the foam was just fine before we made it freon-free is just more bullshit from the "loot and pollute" segment of the far right. Shame on them for trying to use the deaths of the Columbia crew to prop up their anti-ecology agenda.
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re:My idea (Score:3, Informative)
His quote came from Aug 3, 2005. The article you quoted came from May 6, 2003.
Just goes to show if Rush says it, it's probbably wrong.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My idea (Score:2)
The problem isn't that he's wrong, per se, but that his methods are exceedingly error-prone.
Now that Media Matters has pointed out his error, do you think he'll make any effort to correct the notion he put forth? Do you think his original bias is even rational to begin with? He's clearly attempting to make the case that the EPA kills more peopl
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Consider all the dupes, mistakes, etc, and you realize... Gee, He is human. Just like the slash editors.
And this is an excuse for making massive blunders day after day? The difference between Rush Limbaugh and Slashdot is that Slashdot is self-correcting and often has good information. Rush Limbaugh isn't self correcting and almost never has good information.
The size of the audience does not mean check your data better
It should. Larger audience means more money, so more money to actually hire people to c
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Unless you can prove it, STFU. Otherwise, your statements are slanderous.
Please sue my Rush Limbaugh (hope hope hope) PLEASE!!!!
Re:My idea (Score:3, Insightful)
I've read several stories on areas that I actively research. Generally the best modded posts are ones that were obviously written by someone with no knowledge of the topic. I recall reading one story on natural language processing, where a top-modded post indicated that he would be impressed when systems could properly pars
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Well I think the above is definitively flamebait.
Ahh.. so you're the person who thinks any post with any edge to it whatsover is "flamebait". Thanks for taking us down to the level of milquetoast.
As for the ad hominem attacks, you act as if an attack on someones integrity and truthfullness isn't something that matters. It's not an argument of logic, but one of reputation. That is:
1. Person X makes claim Y
2. Person X is a known lier and is almost always wrong.
3. Ignore whatever Person X has to say.
The pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Update (Score:2)
Re:My idea (Score:3, Informative)
What did Mr. Slippery say? "That's a popular meme spread by the likes of Rush Limbaugh"
He blamed Limbaugh for being one of the people who spread that popular (but false) meme.
In Limbaugh's own words (shame on *you* for not even reading the linked site, wherein the words are written):
Re: (Score:2)
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Since they started using freon-free foam every ET, including Columbia's, has been using different kinds of foam for different parts of the tank. With and without freon, respecively. The piece that killed the astronauts was using freon.
Re:My idea (Score:3, Informative)
If the greenies and eco dudes had a clue they would promote safe pebble based nuke plants, concentrated waste is better than 1/2 the planet soaking up waste.
Re:My idea (Score:2)
Instead we should get all the boxes that we have manufacured in this world and pile them up, by the end, we'll have a mountain large enough that it's tip will reach space. So we can just drive there on usual cars once we get the boxes covered with tarmac.
Idea number 2 would be using a cannon to shoot us into space but someone said it could have it's downsides, so i stick with the boxes
Almost Frist Post! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Almost Frist Post! (Score:4, Funny)
You can take my idea and run with it! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:You can take my idea and run with it! (Score:2)
You stole my idea (Score:2)
In fact you can imagine multiple races of engineered humanoids to fulfil various tasks on
Re:You stole my idea (Score:2)
Re:You stole my idea (Score:2)
Fascinating idea, unless you mean sending (dead-listings of) human DNA into space, because some paranoid will protest saying it is just as bad as releasing the source code of some critical piece of software onto an untrusted network: "Just wait a while and the vulnerability exploits will come flying right back at you."
Re:You can take my idea and run with it! (Score:2)
Re:You can take my idea and run with it! (Score:2)
Re:You can take my idea and run with it! (Score:2)
Do you have any idea of the possibilities afforded by an extra pair of hands? Stroke here, pinch here, prod here and scratch here, all at once... She'll love you forever.
Been done (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Been done (Score:2, Funny)
Using Asimov's ideas (Score:2)
Re:Using Asimov's ideas (Score:2)
I think anybody who reads his books and has what it takes to implement said ideas from there shouldn't have to license a patent for anything.....
Do we also go back and pay Italy (or whoever holds the DaVinci estate) for his futuristic musings (such as helocopters, etcetera).
It's a sad world when a sentiment like this is norm.
Re:Using Asimov's ideas (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Using Asimov's ideas (Score:2)
That (your) post had no question(s).
And when did you stop hitting your wife?
No, it's sad that someone can come up with a relatively generic idea (not implementation) and sit on it, wait for someone to make it reality, and then claim ownership of it.
Genius is 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration.
Mankind has imagined fantastic things for at least thousands of years, thinking about it (and printing it in a book) is different fro
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
I did it. (Score:3, Funny)
This is the sort of thing we were trained for. (Score:5, Interesting)
I once had a high tech compnay tell me they "didn't have much call for physics", I didn't have the heart to tell them it was physics than made their computers work and not magic.
I know I'll be working on my ideas to submit. Thanks for the chance NASA!
Re:This is the sort of thing we were trained for. (Score:2)
I completely sympathize -- to a point. You didn't say whether that was the kind of company that could have taken advantage of basic physics for their business.
If the company were e.g. Intel, they'd be fools to respond that way, but if the company were, oh, BEA, or Microsoft, or Adobe, then the fact that physics makes their comp
Figuring out the deal with Gravity (Score:2)
It would be useful to know whether these bodies display MOND effects or not.
Maybe we can figure out the Pioneer Anomaly one way or the other.
Re: This is the sort of thing we were trained for. (Score:2)
> I once had a high tech compnay tell me they "didn't have much call for physics", I didn't have the heart to tell them it was physics than made their computers work and not magic.
Be sure to spellcheck your grant application...
Put capitalism to work. (Score:2)
Re:Put capitalism to work. (Score:2)
Re:Put capitalism to work. (Score:2)
Re:Put capitalism to work. (Score:2)
The market is ALREADY allocating capital to its most efficient use.
By definition, the government is intervening to redirect that capital (tax dollars) towards ends that the market would not otherwise. There is a built-in inefficieny.
Note: I am not saying this is right or wrong - just that it is.
If we completely eliminated NASA, maybe the market would colonize space faster than the go
And the surefire way to get a grant is... (Score:4, Insightful)
(or fellow Americans, judging by Bushs latest statements...)
Pennies (Score:2)
Re:Pennies (Score:2)
50K? Are they serious. So they are going to pull together a panel of experts, drag them into downtown DC for a few days, put them up in hotel rooms, pay them for food, cabs, etc...(at a total cost of what, around 2K per person.. given a panel of 10
Free Brainstorming (Score:2, Interesting)
Needless to say I didn't hear from them.
For the armchari quarterbacks (Score:4, Informative)
Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:2)
I'll take my $400K in small bills, thank you.
This is a PR stunt, I suspect.
Re:Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:5, Insightful)
This is not a PR stunt.
Agencies do this all of the time, they just don't normally get FP'd on Slashdot. The people who usually respond to these things are university labs.
For instance, I am a research assistant, and worked under a similar proposal for the development of Artificial Intelligence. My advisor being the contractor under which the work was done.
The work is in multiple phases, with updates to the funding agency (DARPA) every year or so, and the money amounts are synonymous (though, DARPA has a lot more cash).
If you're looking for PR stunts, look at the DARPA Grand Challenge. No money up-front, and $2 million to the winning team out of a field of over 200 teams, with no cash going out the first year.
For DARPA research, those are bargain basement prizes. That said, I took part, and it was a wonderful experience. Perhaps PR stunts aren't so bad.
Re:Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:2)
The reason I call it a PR stunt is because asking for open-ended "grand visions" doesn't seem likely to turn up anything new that hasn't been considered before - at least by any number of science fiction writers.
Which means I think the money would be better spent reviewing what HAS been considered by other people and then picking whatever seems most likely to be productive of real breakthroughs in technological capability.
Nanotech obviously fits that category.
I doubt ANYBODY has ANY decent comprehensive con
Re:Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:2)
Now, obviously EVERYONE does, it's similar to the personal statement in PhD apps, but more research slanted, and you can be a bit more biased. NASA isn't going to seriously consider anything that puts nothing forward. I'm sure that there is a "put up or shut up" aspect to the app where you at least have to have citations and an explanation that it's a good idea.
That sounds a lot like a standard research proposal to me
Re:Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:2)
They're not looking for pie-in-the-sky fantasies, they're requesting grant proposals, complete with timetables, budgets, and similar projections. They will necessarily get mostly serious proposals. The difference between these and previous grants is that NASA isn't soliciting grants for specific t
Re:Develop nanotech aggressively (Score:2)
On what do you base these doubts? Sure, the goal may sound a bit grandiose, but you gotta start somewhere. Nobody is seriously going to submit a grandiose plan to accomplish that goal in one fell swoop of research."
Why did they cite that then? Or was that from the article submitter? If nobody can successfully s
I've Gotten Two... (Score:5, Informative)
NIAC has put out these calls once or twice a year since the late 90's. It's a cool organization, and I'm not saying that just because they've given me grants -- they've funded lots of really good work in many fields. Now if only NASA proper would follow up on more of it...
Out of the box thinking... (Score:4, Funny)
A: To go where no man has gone before.
Honestly, there's a great scene in Apollo 13 where the crew was staring out the Command Module window as the waste tank was sprayed out into the space. NASA needs some great toilet bowl thinkers if they want to succeed.
Oh man, I've got an idea.. (Score:2)
More geniuses?? (Score:2, Funny)
With that in mind, do we really think NASA needs more geniuses (genii?) and visionaries? I think they need more people that can roll up their sleeves, get their thumbs out of their posteriors, and get some darned work done. JPL seems the only bastion of sense and progress in this massive faceless beauracracy. The rest of it seems to be stuck on the vexing question of exactly what color should the f
What they've already funded... (Score:2)
I've been trying to figure out a software engineering project fun and out there enou
Don't care who usees my idea so long as it is used (Score:2, Interesting)
Novel method for changing orbit of small planetary body (asteroid/comet).
Abstract: Using a tethered "sling" to release pieces of a small planetary body, an small (inexpensive) payload delivered to a body rotating at a sufficient rate can effectively convert its rotational energy into directed kinetic energy. Tether, whic
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Human presence... (Score:2)
while we're here throwing ideas (Score:2)
ok, maybe not interplanetary, but at least send it in orbit around the Moon, or to Cruithne
Sand in space: Orbital Denial Techniques. (Score:2)
NASA doesn't just seek geniuses... (Score:2)
Propulsion (Score:2)
Here's an idea (Score:4, Funny)
slow down (Score:2)
Sample grand visions include how to create a 'self-sustaining, human presence throughout the solar system' and 'truly autonomous robotic operations for exploration and habitation.'
for 50 to 75K? That's K as in years, I hope.
Ohter NASA grants (Score:2)
We need a Physics breakthrough first. (Score:2)
Sending a probe to the solar system is not considered 'space exploration' by SF fans. Space is so huge that, if we make an analogy with a house being Earth and a city being our galaxy, our foot has only been extended to reach 1 nanometre outside of the fro
Re:We need a Physics breakthrough first. (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:4, Insightful)
Probably because most jobs that interview don't require geniuses or visionaries. They need people that work.
Ever been to a meeting with someone who thinks their job is to think outside the box? Half of it is sheer undoable mental masturbation. The parts that can be done are generally thought to be the work of someone else. Geniuses and visionaries are a dime a dozen; great ideas are a given. Give me someone that can actually implement their great idea or vision (or can even be bothered to concieve of a process to make the idea tangible) and then we have something to talk about.
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Half of it is sheer undoable mental masturbation.
Those people aren't likely to be Geniuses or visionaries, they are dreamers. While that is PART of being visionary, that's not the whole story. To be a true visionary, they must be able to 'cook' the idea for a while and find some possible way to make it happen. This means knowing a great deal in several fields. That's where genius comes in. The real genius and visionary will take a heap of those undoable idaes and boil it down to a handful that have some
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:3, Insightful)
I work as a research scientist. I get ideas all the time, every day. Other people I work with mention mind blowing ideas, every day. We all have ideas, ideas are a good thing, but ideas are cheap.
Six months later, one year later, three years later and I read about "my idea" being done by someone.
I used to think I was deluding myself, but I'm forced to keep log books at work, and (cunning as a fox I decided to check a couple of episodes out and) lo and behold; I am not deluding myself.
Here's
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course they can have fun poisoning meetings by coming up with the correct solutions in the first five minutes and presenting them in such an irritating and condescending fashion that the rest of the group will reject them and then leave the meeting forcing the rest to s
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2, Funny)
If he jumps on your desk, pulls down his pants, and starts drinking his own pee, he's a nut. If he purifies the pee with a filter he designed himself before he drinks it, he's a genius.
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:2)
Re:Who doesn't? (Score:5, Funny)
The RIAA? Do I win?
Re:What? (Score:2)
It's cheaper ... (Score:3, Insightful)
This way, they don't spend a cent, and have thousands of
Re:It's cheaper ... (Score:2)
Isn't this the joke where every astronaut brings a piece of the space shuttle?
Re:It's cheaper ... (Score:2)
Re:Similarity (Score:2)
Hold on, I'm packing the fridge now.
Re:Similarity (Score:3, Funny)
Which bank do you use? High interest bank accounts anymore are those that are giving 1%. Many are less than 1% anymore. Or are you reading interest rates the way you read rulers and claim they say 10 inches.....
Re:Whoo (Score:2)
Standards were raised, not lowered.
Re:Whoo (Score:2)
Re:What about foreigners? (Score:2, Funny)
Allright (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm confused when I get modded a troll or flamebate when I'm being a little pessimistic based on reality and reason.
I guess the egg might be still too wet on NASA's face to bust them for wrecking stuff pretty regularly for the past 6 years or so.
NASA needs changing. I've been in a relationship with a PhD that worked at NASA for quite some time. I've been reading NASA publications like Spinoff since about 1977 or 1978. I've known plenty of people that work at NASA that are nervous every 5 to 7 years becau
+1 = Insightful (Score:2)
Sure, private industry would always pay more, but the space program was where it was at. Engineers/scientists in or contracted to NASA were known for being able to achieve wonders, and they did (for example, look at thie history of the LEM).
Now it is seen to be a bureaucratic mess, more suited for the MBAs.