122
  1. I am directing most employees to work from home tomorrow, Wednesday, February 7, so everyone can be in a safe, comfortable environment on a stressful day. Most individuals will not be able to enter the Lab during this mandatory remote work day. A Lab access list has been created and those who will have access will be notified by email shortly. If you do not receive an email instructing you to be on Lab, please plan to work remotely, regardless of your telework agreement status. In addition, and to ensure we have everyone’s accurate contact information, I am also asking everyone to please review and update your personal email and phone number in Workday today.

I don't think I've ever seen a company or organization that had mandatory remote work day outside of really crazy weather during the peak of Covid. Perhaps it's to protect the equipment from distraught or disgruntled employees?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] impartial_fanboy@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago

This is good actually

You're kind of right, it will (hopefully) force JPL to get its shit together when it comes to project management but more importantly, JPL doesn't make rockets.

Sorry to burst your bubble but unless something major happens, the US is going to be the only one capable of projecting any power into space. China is good at playing catch-up but even their plans talk about a having a domestic fully reusable superheavy lift rocket in the 2040's, which could obviously be accelerated somewhat if circumstances demand but we're not talking about a Moon race type situation here. SpaceX/NASA are the only players here right now.

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

US literally forgot how to make rockets when their looted nazis died off and spend 10 years having to beg Russia for a lift. China is steadily keeping its announced terms for everything and basically caught up to NASA in 15 years of what NASA spent 70 to do. In the meantime US is defunding their one somewhat working agency and are throwing insane amount of cash to the Musk grift, which might amount to something due to sheer amount of money but is not nearly as effective an any other space agency and is inherently unstable like all other Musk grifts.

Seeing things like OP and believing USA over China is just utter stupidity.

[-] Evilphd666@hexbear.net 17 points 2 years ago

Kinda funny how that works when you do something cool and then just let the brain drain rot it all away. Even the Rovers - Marc Roper is subjected to YouTube vids and science box subscriptions. Had engineering geniuses on tap and instead of training the next gen to refine practices and keep momentum they shed the talent and destroy the records so every subsequent generation has to reinvent the wheel.

[-] impartial_fanboy@hexbear.net 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Look I'm not saying it's a desirable position but I don't think misrepresenting the situation is helpful either.

US literally forgot how to make rockets when their looted nazis died off and spend 10 years having to beg Russia for a lift.

The ISS was complete so there was no more use for the shuttle other than bleeding money. Obviously the geopolitical situation allowed for them to use the cheap option, they are capitalists after all. But obviously those 90+ y/o nazi engineers were the real reason.

China is steadily keeping its announced terms for everything and basically caught up to NASA in 15 years of what NASA spent 70 to do.

CNSA has been around for 30 years and NASA for 66. It's also much easier to catch up (which they haven't) than to develop initially especially since they were cooperating until 2011. I wish China was putting more effort into their own version of Starship (Long March 9) but at least as of last year they don't intend to have it ready and fully reusable before 2040.

In the meantime US is defunding their one somewhat working agency and are throwing insane amount of cash to the Musk grift.

They're defunding planetary science, not Artemis really. Which is bad obviously but SpaceX is certainly less of a grift than Lockheed Martin or Boeing so I'm not sure where you would put that money instead.

Seeing things like OP and believing USA over China is just utter stupidity.

The OP is about JPL, the division actually being affected by the cuts. Again, they don't make rockets. CNSA says 2030 for the moon but it will be on Long March 10 (i.e. not reusable). NASA says 2026 (which admittedly will probably slip to 2027/2028) but it requires Starship to work. If China manages to get there first it would be impressive and a welcome surprise but they would be unable to sustain a presence there (just as the US was) without a fully reusuable superheavy vehicle.

[-] Runcible@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago

Not germane to your points above but now that there are organizations other than NASA I am not actually sure that layoffs are detrimental (from a tech/development standpoint). Instead of layoffs resulting in the knowledge being lost people can just jump between JPL/SpaceX/Blue Origin and so on. This is one of the easier ways to get knowledge to distribute through the field since our economic system & IP laws discourage meaningful cooperation.

[-] seeking_perhaps@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago

This is nice in theory, but isn't how knowledge transfer of this variety tends to happen in the aerospace industry. Many of those laid off have very specific expertise in niche areas of mechanical and aerospace engineering. Some of that is transferrable, but a lot is specific to things like Mars rovers and planetary science. Tearing those people away from JPL will result in the loss of a ton of institutional knowledge and much of it will not be applicable to the private sector and might just be lost all together.

this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
122 points (100.0% liked)

news

24540 readers
689 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS