<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are we there yet? How &#8217;bout now?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/</link>
	<description>Thinking big in space</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 06:19:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: mrdoornbos</title>
		<link>http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/comment-page-1/#comment-481</link>
		<dc:creator>mrdoornbos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 01:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://evadot.com/?p=1031#comment-481</guid>
		<description>Agree on SpaceX for sure.  I wrote about your point a while ago.  Needs even more coverage: &lt;a href=&quot;http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-spacex-is-the-most-important-company-of-2009/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-space...&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree on SpaceX for sure.  I wrote about your point a while ago.  Needs even more coverage: <a href="http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-spacex-is-the-most-important-company-of-2009/" rel="nofollow">http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-space&#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jesseknoll</title>
		<link>http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/comment-page-1/#comment-480</link>
		<dc:creator>jesseknoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:37:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://evadot.com/?p=1031#comment-480</guid>
		<description>I think it kind of boils down to direction.  With contests there is a clear direction.  Everything is focused on getting things done by X date to win it all.  If you think about it, all the great space advances have happened because of a contest.  First to space, first to the moon, X prize, etc.  Some may not have been formal contests, but they were contests.  With contests you can&#039;t allow committees and general slowness to creep into your processes.  You have problems that need to get solved, and fast.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It seems like the only recent venture to understand this and not only build real hardware and make money is SpaceX.  They do their work in house, and just build most things themselves.  This allows them to keep their agility despite a larger company.  It doesn&#039;t hurt that everything Elon Musk touches - turns to gold.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The other thing that will eventually help drive this is...MONEY!  If some company can figure out a new propulsion method that increases performance by %50 with 10% of the rocket fuel that today&#039;s rockets use, they&#039;ll command the market.  I think the same is true for communications.  Figure out a way to send data by tight beam lasers not just a few miles, but thousands, and you&#039;ll command the way we do business.  This is all space tech that will drive the industry just like it did in the 60&#039;s.  Not only is it space tech, but its tech that we DESPERATELY need to continue space exploration.  The infrastructure (rocket engines, communications, mission planning, launch locations) is horribly outdated and completely plateaued.  We can&#039;t really make faster chemical reaction engines.  You can&#039;t make electromagnetic waves go faster than 300,000km/sec.  We&#039;re at a standstill until the next huge technology leap happens.  I think nanotechnology is probably the best shot we&#039;ve got.  We&#039;re counting on you, private space.  You&#039;re our only hope.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it kind of boils down to direction.  With contests there is a clear direction.  Everything is focused on getting things done by X date to win it all.  If you think about it, all the great space advances have happened because of a contest.  First to space, first to the moon, X prize, etc.  Some may not have been formal contests, but they were contests.  With contests you can&#39;t allow committees and general slowness to creep into your processes.  You have problems that need to get solved, and fast.</p>
<p>It seems like the only recent venture to understand this and not only build real hardware and make money is SpaceX.  They do their work in house, and just build most things themselves.  This allows them to keep their agility despite a larger company.  It doesn&#39;t hurt that everything Elon Musk touches &#8211; turns to gold.</p>
<p>The other thing that will eventually help drive this is&#8230;MONEY!  If some company can figure out a new propulsion method that increases performance by %50 with 10% of the rocket fuel that today&#39;s rockets use, they&#39;ll command the market.  I think the same is true for communications.  Figure out a way to send data by tight beam lasers not just a few miles, but thousands, and you&#39;ll command the way we do business.  This is all space tech that will drive the industry just like it did in the 60&#39;s.  Not only is it space tech, but its tech that we DESPERATELY need to continue space exploration.  The infrastructure (rocket engines, communications, mission planning, launch locations) is horribly outdated and completely plateaued.  We can&#39;t really make faster chemical reaction engines.  You can&#39;t make electromagnetic waves go faster than 300,000km/sec.  We&#39;re at a standstill until the next huge technology leap happens.  I think nanotechnology is probably the best shot we&#39;ve got.  We&#39;re counting on you, private space.  You&#39;re our only hope.  <img src='http://evadot.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mrdoornbos</title>
		<link>http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/comment-page-1/#comment-203</link>
		<dc:creator>mrdoornbos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 21:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://evadot.com/?p=1031#comment-203</guid>
		<description>Agree on SpaceX for sure.  I wrote about your point a while ago.  Needs even more coverage: &lt;a href=&quot;http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-spacex-is-the-most-important-company-of-2009/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-space...&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agree on SpaceX for sure.  I wrote about your point a while ago.  Needs even more coverage: <a href="http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-spacex-is-the-most-important-company-of-2009/" rel="nofollow">http://evadot.com/2009/06/12/forget-apple-space&#8230;</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jesseknoll</title>
		<link>http://evadot.com/2009/09/18/are-we-there-yet-how-bout-now/comment-page-1/#comment-202</link>
		<dc:creator>jesseknoll</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:37:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://evadot.com/?p=1031#comment-202</guid>
		<description>I think it kind of boils down to direction.  With contests there is a clear direction.  Everything is focused on getting things done by X date to win it all.  If you think about it, all the great space advances have happened because of a contest.  First to space, first to the moon, X prize, etc.  Some may not have been formal contests, but they were contests.  With contests you can&#039;t allow committees and general slowness to creep into your processes.  You have problems that need to get solved, and fast.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It seems like the only recent venture to understand this and not only build real hardware and make money is SpaceX.  They do their work in house, and just build most things themselves.  This allows them to keep their agility despite a larger company.  It doesn&#039;t hurt that everything Elon Musk touches - turns to gold.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The other thing that will eventually help drive this is...MONEY!  If some company can figure out a new propulsion method that increases performance by %50 with 10% of the rocket fuel that today&#039;s rockets use, they&#039;ll command the market.  I think the same is true for communications.  Figure out a way to send data by tight beam lasers not just a few miles, but thousands, and you&#039;ll command the way we do business.  This is all space tech that will drive the industry just like it did in the 60&#039;s.  Not only is it space tech, but its tech that we DESPERATELY need to continue space exploration.  The infrastructure (rocket engines, communications, mission planning, launch locations) is horribly outdated and completely plateaued.  We can&#039;t really make faster chemical reaction engines.  You can&#039;t make electromagnetic waves go faster than 300,000km/sec.  We&#039;re at a standstill until the next huge technology leap happens.  I think nanotechnology is probably the best shot we&#039;ve got.  We&#039;re counting on you, private space.  You&#039;re our only hope.  :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it kind of boils down to direction.  With contests there is a clear direction.  Everything is focused on getting things done by X date to win it all.  If you think about it, all the great space advances have happened because of a contest.  First to space, first to the moon, X prize, etc.  Some may not have been formal contests, but they were contests.  With contests you can&#39;t allow committees and general slowness to creep into your processes.  You have problems that need to get solved, and fast.</p>
<p>It seems like the only recent venture to understand this and not only build real hardware and make money is SpaceX.  They do their work in house, and just build most things themselves.  This allows them to keep their agility despite a larger company.  It doesn&#39;t hurt that everything Elon Musk touches &#8211; turns to gold.</p>
<p>The other thing that will eventually help drive this is&#8230;MONEY!  If some company can figure out a new propulsion method that increases performance by %50 with 10% of the rocket fuel that today&#39;s rockets use, they&#39;ll command the market.  I think the same is true for communications.  Figure out a way to send data by tight beam lasers not just a few miles, but thousands, and you&#39;ll command the way we do business.  This is all space tech that will drive the industry just like it did in the 60&#39;s.  Not only is it space tech, but its tech that we DESPERATELY need to continue space exploration.  The infrastructure (rocket engines, communications, mission planning, launch locations) is horribly outdated and completely plateaued.  We can&#39;t really make faster chemical reaction engines.  You can&#39;t make electromagnetic waves go faster than 300,000km/sec.  We&#39;re at a standstill until the next huge technology leap happens.  I think nanotechnology is probably the best shot we&#39;ve got.  We&#39;re counting on you, private space.  You&#39;re our only hope.  <img src='http://evadot.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

