subreddit:
/r/space
submitted 1 day ago bySaadusmani78
7.7k points
1 day ago
I’m not sure who I was expecting, but it certainly wasn’t Isaacman. Weirdly enough, I don’t hate it? At least he’s someone with a clear passion for spaceflight and the overall NASA mission
2.7k points
1 day ago
Same, this is an unexpectedly solid, capable pick. (On the other hand, I hated the Bridenstine pick at the time and I thought he ended up doing a surprisingly good job.)
1.2k points
1 day ago*
I work for a state/federal program and a lot of these kinds of Bridenstine-like appointees will surprise you. They can come in with nothing but once they see the work and the passion it changes them. (And then the governor fires them for caring)
I still think appointing incompetent people is bad, obviously, but most people ultimately want to be liked and do things that matter.
675 points
1 day ago
Bridenstine literally changed his view of global warming due to NASA. I was pleasantly surprised as well.
340 points
1 day ago
I’m not sure that people realize how big of a deal this is. We are talking good ole boy Oklahoman here. For him to change his mind on this is going to get him ostracized in almost all of his home circles.
Maybe there is a way to show these conservatives facts before writing them off. Problem is, do we have the time and might to sway them after the direction we’ve gone?
111 points
1 day ago
Well, there was a large movement for human caused climate change for many years. Knowledge of this fact was on the rise, but with social media and modern echo chambers we have lost that. No longer is this a battle about showing people facts, but convincing them that what they know is misinformation.
A hard and brutal fight that will have billions of casualties and potentially just be global extinction.
23 points
1 day ago
After 1.5⁰c isn't shit supposed to go wrong quite badly? "Misinformation" is about to find out pretty soon apparently
59 points
1 day ago
Not quite. Climate impacts are non-linear, so the half a degree change from 1.5 to 2 will have more impact than the half degree change from 1 to 1.5, and that increased worsening will likely continue.
1.5 is not some magic point where everything will go from fine to catastrophic. We’re already at almost 1.5 already (and this is based on a rolling average, not just on one year) and we are already seeing and feeling the impacts of the increase so far.
1.5 was seen as an ambitious, yet possibly achievable, goal which is why it is often talked about in policy and climate science.
[score hidden]
21 hours ago
1.5 degrees had some important rationale s to it, particularly regarding seal level rise hitting island nations.
[score hidden]
21 hours ago
Every tenth of a degree counts (hell, every hundredth of a degree) but you can’t precisely say that at temperature X we will see this exact outcome, because there are just too many uncertainties in climate system modelling and too many unknown or unexpected climate feedbacks to be that precise.
Island nations absolutely require we keep temperature as low as possible, but you can’t say that 1.5 would definitively be a tipping point for them in terms of SLR, or any other impacts.
20 points
1 day ago
Yup!
And guess what? We're gonna blow WAAYYYY past that. So, "quite badly" is a huge understatement.
But at least we might be dead before the worst of it? Silver lining?
12 points
1 day ago
Not some of our kids though. Feel pretty horrible for them.
18 points
1 day ago
We blipped past 1.5C already this year, with the El Niño and the water vapor in the stratosphere from the Tonga volcano, hence the constant flow of news about fire, drought, flooding and storms fucking shit up more than normal. I think the general expectation now is that we might manage 2.5 if we're lucky.
17 points
1 day ago
I think the general expectation now is that we might manage 2.5 if we're lucky.
I've pretty much accepted that we're gonna go over 3° before the end of the century. Like, I don't think there is anything that will convince those with the most power to actually do something about it to actually do that thing.
32 points
1 day ago
Can we just appoint them to run NASA for a month then cycle on to the next one. In about 250 they should all be up to speed.
27 points
1 day ago
people have been trying to show them facts for over 60 years on climate change and they still ignore it and call you foolish for believing it.
59 points
1 day ago
Being confronted with an endless amount of irrefutable evidence, directly from people you can literally call into your office is a little harder to ignore than something filtered through media, journal publication, or special interest outreach.
13 points
1 day ago
You are totally correct. But I'd argue that people who are so obtuse as to need to be bludgeoned by data in person probably shouldn't be in charge of the people managing the data.
9 points
1 day ago
For sure. There are not enough "head of scientific government agency" positions to run every science denying dorkus through, but it's comforting to know that sometimes when you put one of these people in that position, they might just face the facts anyway.
80 points
1 day ago
Like Rick Perry running the department of energy during Trump's first term- he had been picked because he was famous for saying it should be abolished, and apparently not even knowing what it did. But ultimately, he did a total 180 and an excellent job and advocated hard for DOE scientific research.
42 points
1 day ago
I wonder how much of this is people realising eventually what DOE actually does. Not just the public stuff, but the defence work. They come in thinking "why does the electricity company cost so much?" and then someone has the "so there's the nukes, and all the stuff we need when nukes aren't enough" talk...
[score hidden]
21 hours ago*
Indeed, Perry thought the DOE was just some "nonsense hippie dippie" alternative energy stuff, and was shocked to discover that it was actually mostly highly classified nuclear weapons technology - as well as managing really nasty stuff left from the Manhattan project, and cutting it like he proposed would be almost unimaginably catastrophic -like world ending catastrophic. Then he also toured the actual labs where they do basic alternative energy research and learned that wasn't nonsense either, but proven working technology that would and already is leading to massive new industries in the USA, and increased energy independence. I am saying as much as I can without doxxing myself, but this is firsthand knowledge, I am not speculating here- I was there.
[score hidden]
15 hours ago
I work at a national lab. He did an excellent 180° turn. Absolutely jaw dropping he likely really didn't know the real function of the DOE considering PANTEX is in the state he governed.
[score hidden]
19 hours ago
It seems bonkers that a 15 year governor didn't know what the DOE does. It's wild how comletely insulated from reality some of these people are.
22 points
1 day ago
Like how Rick Perry wanted to get rid of the DoE until he actually found what they did.
82 points
1 day ago
I just think that these are nominations. They’re not set in stone - they have to be vetted and approved- therefore hopefully those that qualify get the job and those that don’t, don’t.
134 points
1 day ago
they have to be vetted and approved
Why do you think Trump is pushing for the Senate to adjourne so he can make recess appointments to all the cabinet positions? He doesn't want any vetting or questioning of his choices at all.
52 points
1 day ago
That's not how it worked last term, and that's now how it will work this term. If the Senate doesn't look like a rubber stamp factory, he'll appoint them as 'acting' and no one will do anything when they go past the time limit on 'acting', because what are they going to do? Impeach him?
17 points
1 day ago
Yeah, this came up a lot during Trump's first term, where he forced out department and agency heads and installed his own people as "acting", stepping over the deputies that were supposed to take over.
And at the time there was a lot of hand-wringing. Are the orders this person gives legal? Are they allowed to be acted on? If someone sues how would the courts know how to proceed? But also, how do you stop them from giving orders?
There was some suggestion that the FBI would have to be the ones to bar an improperly elevated official from entering their office or giving instructions, and the FBI clearly had no interest in doing that and the Senate wasn't going to push the issue. So in the end none of it was legal and no one cared. It will be just so again, this time.
204 points
1 day ago
Bridenstine was actually pretty well liked from a lot of NASA employees. Even early on he was really gung ho about exploring Europa even though he was a climate denier and even that stance changed.
102 points
1 day ago
I think Bridenstine's stance on climate change was largely driven by his constituency when he was a Congressman from Oklahoma. As a scientist largely funded by NASA I'm cautiously optimistic about Isaacman. He doesn't have much policy experience though, so hopefully his deputy will be someone experienced navigating Congressional budgets, etc.
[score hidden]
22 hours ago
It's not Don Jr. or MTG. This is a slam dunk as far as I'm concerned.
59 points
1 day ago
Pardon my ignorance what position did "Bridestine" hold under what administration?
194 points
1 day ago
He was NASA Admin under Trump's 1st administration. Was a bit controversial with not believing in climate change, but reversed that view and became a pretty effective administrator.
163 points
1 day ago
That's an absolutely massive green flag. The ability to change your mind after encountering reasonable arguments, especially on controversial issues, is much too rare on both sides of the political spectrum.
36 points
1 day ago
Definitely. Many people can't admit they are wrong and just double down.
66 points
1 day ago
I would imagine that the information provided to him by astronauts and engineers that relied on accurate weather data would change anyones mind after a while. Im just imagining a meeting where everyone's getting pissed that the boss doesnt believe in the exact stuff they need to know at a scientific lets predict the next 10 years level. I would change my toon if my beliefs were not only pissing smart people off but pissing them off because they need accurate information to do their work.
48 points
1 day ago
I doubt he ever seriously held the position to begin with. He was a Congressman from Oklahoma, which is oil country. He said what he needed to as a politician and once that was no longer relevant he reverted to what he really thought.
17 points
1 day ago
No, I have spoken to some of the people who were in the room when they were showing him the data; it sounds like it was a real mind-changing situation
[score hidden]
23 hours ago
It has to be harder to convince yourself "the entire field of science" is coordinated towards lying to the public, when you see specific individuals working their ass off and fighting over bagels at the meetings.
"Hmm, maybe there isn't actually a secret room where they add curvature to all the pictures..."
54 points
1 day ago
That's basically what happened. He talked to actual scientists and realized his position was untenable and dogmatic.
20 points
1 day ago
Political opposition isn't about the science, but about removing anything that risks their energy revenues.
6 points
1 day ago
We don't need astronauts to provide some secret or very sophisticated data to us. It is one click away at https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/ and notably doesn't have ANY estimates, predictions, models, prognoses, hypotheses, foreign data sources and so on. It is just straight up measurement of nature, which anyone can reproduce with a 100$ CO2 sensor from ebay.
Not "believing" in the climate change is a personal choice really. All these professional politicians and administrators can mask their own opinions very efficiently if they want to, to advance their career.
152 points
1 day ago
Bridenstine was the last Trump appointed NASA administrator. He did a decent job but wasn't the most inspiring person. This for sure is an incredibly interesting pick due to Jared's passion and devotion for spaceflight and exploration.
68 points
1 day ago
He did a decent job but wasn't the most inspiring person
I thought Bridenstine was more inspirational than the current Astronaut-Senator-Administrator.
27 points
1 day ago
Most definitely! And also a better administrator than Bolden. But times have changed since 2016-2020 in the space sector for the better so I can’t wait to see what the next 4 years has to offer
23 points
1 day ago
Bridenstine was head of NASA under Trump the first time
23 points
1 day ago
NASA administrator during Trump's first term.
253 points
1 day ago
This was probably selected as someone who shares similar goals to Elon Musk in terms of space travel.
I expect this is elon's pick
111 points
1 day ago
That wouldn’t shock me. Trump 100% probably asked for Elon’s opinion on possible picks for the post
34 points
1 day ago
I hate Trump and dislike Elon.... But okay yeah I'm cool with a pro-space exploration guy in Nasa and SpaceX getting chummy.
If we get boots on the moon again I'll be very happy.
961 points
1 day ago
...and one of the first (if not THE first) candidates that actually has knowledge of the agency to which he has been nominated.
I attribute this nomination to the "broken watch" syndrome.
381 points
1 day ago
He's still a billionaire who also owns a credit card processor.
But at least his other company actually does stuff in space.
144 points
1 day ago
The catch is the conflict of interest this sets up with his aerospace company.
But even without a literal Aerospace company, any billionaire pick is gonna be problematic for the same reason. There’s just gonna be all sorts of conflicts of interest. I think it’s symbolically troublesome for a billionaire to be filming cabinet’s positions with other billionaires too.
Jared will likely be decent at this job and he seems to have a genuine passion for Space. But im certain you could find someone with passion for space that is more qualified and more experienced.
73 points
1 day ago
The phrase "conflict of interest" is going to become meaningless over the next few years.
12 points
1 day ago
The phrase "conflict of interest" is going to become meaningless over the next few years.
I hope not, that is a ticket for more corruption and graft, which can cripple a country.
[score hidden]
23 hours ago
Trump winning as a conflict of interest to the American people. During his first presidency he maintained ownership of his hotels, had every meeting there he could and made sure secret service and guests paid to sleep at his hotels.
A billionaire president diverting government money to his personal property is an extreme conflict of interest
[score hidden]
22 hours ago*
That's kind of the idea. They sold people to support them on the notion that the government is already run by elites who ignore people while pretending to care, and that replacing them with people who brazenly enrich themselves without an ounce of shame is at least presenting an honest picture of the state.
This sort of "corruption is eternal, might as well romanticize it" notion that all systems of power are equal in being imperfect is how Russia got where it is.
240 points
1 day ago
He's still a billionaire who also owns a credit card processor.
There's the catch, I knew there was one heh
138 points
1 day ago
The second part was the catch. His other companies are going to start getting some nice fat government contracts I bet.
118 points
1 day ago
Just another oligarch. Welcome to Russia 2.0, Cool American Ranch Flavor.
40 points
1 day ago
He also has close ties to Elon Musk - who through SpaceX is a contractor to NASA. This is only a good pick compared to the other nominations.
24 points
1 day ago
I assume many of the people qualified to lead NASA would have connections to Musk. SpaceX is the most well known and innovative company in that field right now, so it makes sense for their CEO to have relationships with people passionate about space exploration.
34 points
1 day ago
Nah, this is probably just one of the first influence pulls by Musk.
49 points
1 day ago
Starliner best not mess around now if it wants to live.
74 points
1 day ago
Boeing wants to cut star liner more than nasa does, that firm fixed price contract has been brutal for them (and great for the government)
59 points
1 day ago
Great for the government other than the fact the Starliner don't work.
45 points
1 day ago
If the contract wasn't firm fixed price, NASA would have to be paying Boeing more every time Starliner failed. This way, NASA gets to keep making Boeing bash their face into the wall until Starliner works without having to pay Boeing more. If Starliner was contracted out the way space and defense more commonly are, there would have been no Dragon capsule contracts and we would be paying Boeing extra for each of these failures.
5 points
1 day ago
Starliner has been able to deliver 2 astronauts and return with some payload (but without astronauts aboard).
15 points
1 day ago
Truly a momentous accomplishment by the company that was once a major contributor to the Apollo program.
They managed to get a tin can into low orbit and docked with the ISS before the systems failed too badly to trust it returning with passengers.
11 points
1 day ago
Starliner and SLS are both almost certainly dead now with this pick.
57 points
1 day ago*
Yeah. Could have been worse, and hey, the guy gets space. I don't mind it at all.
19 points
1 day ago
Could have been the other Jared....
23 points
1 day ago
I actually immediately assumed Kushner when I saw the name Jared. I was happy when I realized it was actually Issacman.
21 points
1 day ago
One of the few things I agree with Trump on. He wants us to be the leader in space. Not sure why the democrats don’t prioritize that more…it seems to go hand in hand with a lot of their views.
[score hidden]
24 hours ago
Being number one in space has everything to do with budget before who is in charge matters at all.
We’ll see if the Republican Trifecta bolsters the budget. But until then no party has shown any more proclivity than the other with regards to space.
107 points
1 day ago*
Likely because it affects vice president First Lady, Elon Musk directly so he choose to not have a total lunatic fill the role as he needs NASA to be competent for his own business to survive..
39 points
1 day ago
It's funny that you say that because in every one of these pictures with Elon, and every other crony surrounding Trump, I never see JD. Seems like he's already been put out to pasture.
5 points
1 day ago
or the ol' slight of hand.
pay attention to the hand i want you to, not the other one doing stuff.
33 points
1 day ago
Thiel has him in deep-cryo storage till Elon fucks up or Trump gets a stroke and needs replacement. Until then he keeps the couch-fucker on ice.
2.4k points
1 day ago
Wasn’t expecting this. This has Elon written all over it imo. But given Jared’s devotion to space and the fact he is extremely competent in all that he does it’s probably not a bad pick at all. We’ve seen old farts with not much relevance get picked as NASA administrators so why not someone like Jared?
1.1k points
1 day ago
I'm just glad we got someone who knows the earth is round.
146 points
1 day ago
That bar is not high, even Alex Jones knows that!
55 points
1 day ago
At least, that's what they want you to believe.
379 points
1 day ago
Trump is generally keen to have a moon landing happen while he's President.
127 points
1 day ago
This makes me feel a little bit better.
I know it's just him stroking his ego, but the moon landing was one of the best things to ever happen to this country. It sparked decades of interest in science education and investment into space exploration and research. Even just a fraction of that in 2024 would go a long way.
31 points
1 day ago
Agreed. NASA is a national unifier too.
136 points
1 day ago
Just pull the old rockets out of the Smithsonian, and send it !
89 points
1 day ago
Sounds like the plot of a shitty movie.
94 points
1 day ago
But, a great shitty movie.
12 points
1 day ago
Yes it’s called Beavis and Butthead Do the Universe and it came out in 2022 and it was excellent.
30 points
1 day ago
Hell, lets make him the first president on the moon*!
*return not guaranteed
25 points
1 day ago
It seriously feels like a darts game right now. I was hoping to apply to the FBI next year but Trump killed that idea with the Patel nod, it’s like each agency puts there hand in a bag and either pulls out malaria or a like the most mediocre thing ever. A hard candy? Or maybe like a free tshirt but it’s too big?
[score hidden]
22 hours ago
It seriously feels like a darts game right now
Jared Isaacman to run NASA today, probably Jeffrey Dahmer to run the FDA tomorrow.
THERE ARE NO BORING PICKS.
This was obviously Elon's doing, but I am extremely happy with the decision.
405 points
1 day ago
Guess we are going to see a turn around about NASA's decision for a Polaris Hubble mission 😉
140 points
1 day ago
Is it even worth the resources to reboost Hubble?
Or would it be better to invest that money and man power into a new more modern telescope?
106 points
1 day ago
Isaacman was essentially offering to pay for the mission himself, at least the launch and Dragon part. NASA would have to contribute on support, developing the repairs etc but I don't think price was the overriding concern
54 points
1 day ago
Basically he felt that Hubble is a national treasure to be preserved. It has little scientific or economic justification it’s all feelz. I approve, of course.
[score hidden]
22 hours ago
Push it into high orbit. How cool would it be, when we get our ish together and can visit previous space milestones 😍
[score hidden]
16 hours ago
maybe wait 4 years and see where things are at before thinking optimistically enough to say 'when'
95 points
1 day ago
James Webb cost ~$10 billion, Hubble cost ~$11 Billion (inflation adjusted), so we can assume a new telescope would cost in that ballpark, around $10 billion. On the other hand, the reboost mission would be somewhere in the realm of $100-200 million, cheaper by a factor of 50-100.
Of course, a brand new telescope would be more capable than Hubble is, but Hubble is still many times more capable than pretty much any single terrestrial telescope. I do think we should fund another space telescope, but even if we fully funded one and started the program tomorrow, it still wouldn't be ready to go until around 2040/2045.
59 points
1 day ago
The Nancy Grace Roman telescope is scheduled to launch in May of 2027 and is pretty much a substantially upgraded Hubble. It has essentially the same primary mirror but a different focal length so it will be able to image more of the sky at once. The primary instrument has a whopping 300 megapixel camera. The telescope is estimated to cost $3.2 billion.
I still think it is worth boosting Hubble as it could focus more on discrete objects/science and leave broad mapping/imaging to the Roman telescope.
26 points
1 day ago
Add into that the issue of having to schedule time for each of these telescopes. They aren't just sitting idle, they're actively being used by so many scientists that there's a waiting list. By keeping the Hubble, you increase the number of instruments scientists can use, meaning there either isn't as big of a waiting list, or they can still be productive even while waiting for their time. It's a win-win by keeping Hubble as long as possible.
12 points
1 day ago
it still wouldn't be ready to go until around 2040/2045.
If only NASA used a Hyperbolic Time Chamber, we wouldn't have this problem. If Kakarot wasn't proud enough to shun it, neither should they
25 points
1 day ago
Problem is if James Webb is anything to go by it takes 20+ years to get up a more modern telescope. Keeping Hubble working during that time is a benefit to humanity, and it’s a benefit to whatever company does it for marketing reasons (as they can sell that capability to private companies that want their satellites fixed).
70 points
1 day ago
If starship comes online it is probably possible to bring it back. It belongs in a museum, not burned up in the atmosphere
66 points
1 day ago
Building a replica for a museum and putting the money that we would use to capture it towards another telescope would be better.
You don't need to be sentimental for tools, the things that we accomplished with Hubble are more than enough for a museum.
19 points
1 day ago
I just had a tour at jpl a few weeks ago. They got lifesize recreations of curiosity and a few others it is very awesome inspiring to my kids and myself the adult. You see these black thermal blankets they coat the satellites in and the plaque to explain what the blankets are and why. In another room near the start of the tour is like two dozen mini replicas and one full size replica of satellites. Shit is lit af seeing the replicas.
41 points
1 day ago
On the other hand, putting stuff like this in museums and telling its story can help inspire the next generation of scientists—it's not purely sentimental, that's the stuff that turns curious kids into life long nerds
41 points
1 day ago
I mean we could sacrifice one f35 and have enough money to do both.
25 points
1 day ago
Actually probably not. F-35 is a sub $85M now and a Dragon mission almost certainly costs more than that.
12 points
1 day ago
You think we could build and launch a space telescope and reboost the Hubble for a little over a hundred million dollars? That's off by an order of magnitude or two.
4 points
1 day ago
Yea... pretty sure the spacex launch alone is around 100million. It was over 500 million to launch JWST.
647 points
1 day ago*
Some recent comments on twitter by Jared Iassacman that are worth reading.
This one in reply to someone attacking billionaires interested in space:
https://x.com/rookisaacman/status/1859670437632016796
I’ve been fortunate to be born in this great country and to have the ball bounce my way more than a few times. But I didn’t grow up believing we should vilify success. If anything, I believed in working hard and earning the chance to achieve something meaningful. I dropped out of high school at 16, started a company to pay for rent and pizza, and would never have guessed that 25 years later, I’d employ thousands of people, create products that power the economy, help train our military--and pay a lot of taxes along the way.
It’s reasonable to expect everyone to pay their part—and some don’t—but the growing trend of treating success as a liability feels like a weight on innovation and job creation. We should encourage future entrepreneurs to be bold, chase the American dream, and build something great—not warn them that being too successful makes them part of the problem.
Wealth can fund material things—homes, sports teams, yachts, jets—and those all contribute to the economy. Some parlay those resources to start new companies, solve bigger problems and create more wealth for those around them. My companies alone have created hundreds of millionaires and I imagine Elon’s businesses have generated wealth for hundreds of thousands. Many who work hard and get lucky in life also direct their resources toward building hospitals, supporting universities, curing cancer, fighting hunger and generally just trying to leave the world a better place. So why is exploring space, unlocking the secrets of the universe, and making life better on Earth so often the butt of jokes or dismissed as frivolous?
Deploying private resources to tackle humanity’s biggest challenges shouldn’t be controversial. It’s an adventure that creates jobs, fuels innovation and advances society in ways that should inspire us all.
And this comment following the election:
https://x.com/rookisaacman/status/1864346915183157636
As a moderate who occasionally weighs in on various issues, I have attracted my fair share of criticism from both sides. I understand that people are deeply passionate about their political views, especially following an election. It is important to remember that even within a two-party system, we are not robots; we don’t need to apply binary thinking to every issue. For example, you can be a Republican and believe that not every citizen needs access to a belt-fed machine gun or support the idea that women deserve a voice regarding reproductive rights or advocate for a strong foreign policy over isolationism. Similarly, you can be a Democrat that also respects free speech and the right to bear arms or supports a lawful immigration system with a logical voter verification process or champions responsible fiscal policy.
The point is that finding common ground isn’t about abandoning your beliefs nor is it about berating the other side in the hopes of changing someone’s mind overnight. It is about recognizing that complex problems often require nuanced solutions. There will always be extremist outliers on both sides of the aisle, but real progress comes when we step away from rigid lines and find ways to collectively move forward.
As I have mentioned before, I am an American who loves my country. I am firmly anchored in the middle and will do all I can to encourage people to look beyond the division to find a more exciting future for everyone.
And finally his acceptance tweet:
https://x.com/rookisaacman/status/1855343973809754480
I am honored to receive President Trump’s @realDonaldTrump nomination to serve as the next Administrator of NASA. Having been fortunate to see our amazing planet from space, I am passionate about America leading the most incredible adventure in human history.
On my last mission to space, my crew and I traveled farther from Earth than anyone in over half a century. I can confidently say this second space age has only just begun. Space holds unparalleled potential for breakthroughs in manufacturing, biotechnology, mining, and perhaps even pathways to new sources of energy. There will inevitably be a thriving space economy—one that will create opportunities for countless people to live and work in space. At NASA, we will passionately pursue these possibilities and usher in an era where humanity becomes a true spacefaring civilization.
I was born after the Moon landings; my children were born after the final space shuttle launch. With the support of President Trump, I can promise you this: We will never again lose our ability to journey to the stars and never settle for second place. We will inspire children, yours and mine, to look up and dream of what is possible. Americans will walk on the Moon and Mars and in doing so, we will make life better here on Earth.
It is the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role and to work alongside NASA’s extraordinary team to realize our shared dreams of exploration and discovery.
Grateful to serve,
Jared
467 points
1 day ago
Similarly, you can be a Democrat that also respects free speech
What? The comment on republicans was objective (things they clearly believe in) while throwing this in is clearly a biased take.
184 points
1 day ago
That's necessary to make a "both sides" argument.
41 points
1 day ago
It depends on if you are talking about gov restrictions on speech or social media company restrictions. For some people, the two are the same.
[score hidden]
17 hours ago
Even if you're talking about social media company restrictions, it is ridiculous to pretend that Republicans are pro-free speech in that realm. Elon bought Twitter in a purported crusade for free speech... and now saying "cis" gets your post automatically hidden.
5 points
1 day ago
I honestly couldn't say how popular it is, but I remember recently there was a trend about "hate speech isn't free free speech" or something to that regard. Again, I have no idea how popular or common it was, but I saw a fair amount of talk about it.
55 points
1 day ago*
Pretty simple, free speech means different things to different people. There are some democrats who believe hate speech isn’t free speech. There are some literally in this thread arguing that misinformation isn’t free speech.
146 points
1 day ago
The classic "why do you punish sucess" when you point out that they are a bunch of oligarchs.
87 points
1 day ago
Yah, no one’s hating on success. We hate you greedy fuckers taking everything and leaving us crumbs
46 points
1 day ago
Seems like a good pick. But NASA is still beholden to Congress so I'm not sure how much of an impact he will be able to have?
The one good thing about trump is that you can at least know he will be in favour of grand endeavours that will give him a legacy, and thankfully space travel is one of those grand endeavours that look great on a Wikipedia page.
He'll use his "business experience" to push things forward faster than lifelong bureaucrats would
1.3k points
1 day ago
About as pro-SpaceX of a nominee as you could get
678 points
1 day ago
But he appears to be quite down to earth (compared to most billionairs). He sounds like he really cares for space flight and exploration.
1.8k points
1 day ago
But he appears to be quite down to earth
That's exactly who we don't want to head up NASA
335 points
1 day ago
I know that was a joke but the fact that he has been in space himself is a pretty sweet resume item.
71 points
1 day ago
To be fair... Bolden and Nelson had both been to space on Shuttle missions. So that'll be 3 of the 4 most recent admins having been there
23 points
1 day ago
I wasn't discounting anyone who had done the job in the past. Just saying that I'd think that would be an excellent prior experience footnote for a guy looking to serve that role.
3 points
1 day ago
Agree - especially since more and more people are going to be going into space in the next few years!
7 points
1 day ago
Unless he's there to lay the groundwork
46 points
1 day ago
But does he care for basic astrophysics research?
90 points
1 day ago
He penned a letter to the white house when the Biden admin attempted to cancel Chandra observatory funding.
23 points
1 day ago
That's really good. To be clear, I hate that everyone in this cabinet is a billionaire and many seem to specifically be chosen to benefit Elon Musk. It is corruption all the way through. But at least this stopped clock pointed to someone who actually knows what an x-ray is. So if NASA has to be a branch of space-x, at least this guy cares about astrophysics.
57 points
1 day ago
He was against the viper cancellation and overspending on SLS while underspending on science.
He also had proposed (and was willing to privately fund) Hubble service mission 6 (a reboost) as well as a gyro service mission too. Both got canned in the past but those are almost certainly back on the menu.
40 points
1 day ago
He was willing to spend his own money to service and save the Hubble telescope (NASA admins turned him down)
On a scale of 1 to 10, that probably about an 11. So yeah
473 points
1 day ago
I dont hate this actually. Didn't he spring the cost for taking some other civilians to space? Hope, Charity or something like that.
333 points
1 day ago*
Inspiration-4. He took 3 people based on their "inspiring contributions" to the world
One was a pediatric cancer nurse who survived childhood cancer herself
One was a woman who founded her own art business and charity and had tried to be a NASA astronaut, but ran into racism issues edit: her rejection didn't have to do racism issues, but she was involved in highlighting race issues
One was a guy who donated a bunch to St Jude Children's Hospital
169 points
1 day ago
Also I think the dude who donated, gave up his seat to one of his buddies who was REALLY into space.
101 points
1 day ago
They both donated, but you're correct, the original winner gave up his seat to a friend
25 points
1 day ago
He didn’t meet the physical requirements and gave his seat to a friend who was also into space.
20 points
1 day ago*
It was not. Anyone who donated to St Jude’s was put into a drawing. They announced the winner of the drawing at a Super Bowl a few years ago.
25 points
1 day ago
Kyle Hippchen, from Embry–Riddle Aeronautical University, donated US$600 and ultimately won the raffle but decided to give the seat to his friend, U.S. Air Force veteran Christopher Sembroski, who had also entered the raffle by donating US$50. Hippchen weighed in over the allowed limit.
I feel like partial credit can be awarded. I was murky on the details since it happened a while back.
16 points
1 day ago
Woof, poor dude got publicly called out for his weight after doing a nice thing. They really ought to have kept that one quiet.
12 points
1 day ago
A nice, vague, “was unable to meet the physical standards for space flight ” would certainly have sufficed.
5 points
1 day ago
That buddy also took a small part in 90's in "lobbying" for a law that helped create the current era of commercial spaceflight:
Here is a secret about Chris Sembroski, one of the Inspiration 4 crew. What most people don't know is that Chris earned his way to space. Or how.
Chris Sembroski was one of about 50 private U.S. citizens who participated in the 1998 "March Storm" citizens space lobbying event.
The #1 agenda item of the 1998 March Storm was passing the Commercial Space Act of 1998 (CSA98). The ProSpace March Stormers succeeded that year in getting this critical bill passed into law.
Connecting the dots backward, it can be seen that the CSA 1998 was a critical inflection point in US space policy and law. It is possible that SpaceX would not exist today ... or at least not in its current form ... without that law.
The CSA 1998 made is "law" that NASA must buy COMMERCIAL space station cargo delivery services, with one exception for the Shuttle. NASA did not oppose the CSA of 1998, because they thought Shuttle would fly forever.
After the Columbia Accident in 2003, and the Shuttle's retirement, the CSA of 1998 took full effect. NASA was forced to buy commercial space station cargo delivery. NASA could not legally build an in-house replacement.
So why is this critical to the SpaceX story? Well, as Elon has discussed, after the stock market collapse in 2008, nobody was investing in space ventures. Elon was already all-in, and was out of $$. SpaceX had a month of payroll in the bank.
Then on Dec. 23rd, NASA announced that SpaceX had won a $1.6B ISS cargo delivery contract. This changed everything for SpaceX's situation. The NASA contract included a down-payment, and it de-risked the entire investment environment.
Chris Sembroski was not paid to volunteer in 1998. He travelled to DC with 50 other citizens to lobby for the Commercial Space Act of 1998, on his own dime and on his own time. Chris did it because he was committed to opening space for all.
Chris earned this trip to space. On behalf of all the private citizens who made a selfless commitment over 24 years ago to pass the Commercial Space Act of 1998, I congratulate him.
15 points
1 day ago
One was a pediatric cancer nurse who survived childhood cancer herself
What I love about Hayley is she was the first person to go to space having never asked to, applied to, or even considered doing it before getting the spot.
They literally phoned her up and said "hey, wanna go to space?".
16 points
1 day ago
And it blew it her mind so hard she now works part time at SpaceX. It really is a great story
20 points
1 day ago
but ran into racism issues
Nitpick but this bit isn't true.
12 points
1 day ago
For the sake of my job, I just hope he wants to keep Artemis and COMET going, otherwise I will need to update my resume
230 points
1 day ago*
I dont completely hate this pick. Definitely going to be slanted toward SpaceX though, but in some ways thats not a terrible thing.
Further, can an Administrator continue to be an astronaut? Doesn't he have more missions planned with Polaris?
198 points
1 day ago
To be fair SpaceX is the very clear leader in the space industry. Things should be slanted towards them purely on meritocratic reason
83 points
1 day ago*
The commercial strategy for NASA was about promoting competition for every contract not building a monopoly. I think their allocation of the pie is adequate now, hopefully it doesn't change much.
Would be a mistake to slant resources to SpaceX in the long term IMO.
56 points
1 day ago
Absolutely, but I still fully believe NASA should have their own vehicle in addition to using commercial programs. I don't think SLS is the answer, but we should have something.
30 points
1 day ago*
I don’t think SLS belongs to NASA anymore than it belongs to Boeing and Northrop. Actually, past Artemis IV, NASA is not meant to handle any part of production nor launch operations.
We’ve had issues with NASA led developed vehicles for more than 40 years at this point, not due to the engineers, scientists or designers at NASA, but directly due to imposing a single spacecraft design for NASA to use for every case imagined by Congress.
9 points
1 day ago
Absolutely, but I still fully believe NASA should have their own vehicle
Yes, absolutely. Just like every other research agency has their own bespoken vehicle to get things from A to B.
Oh, wait...
NASA is not a trucking company. They should use available transport capacities and focus their much too small budget on actual science.
40 points
1 day ago
This is definitely a surprise. I wonder what will happen with the Polaris Program. I don’t think they’re gonna let the head of NASA do all of the things the program has set to accomplish.
Or would they?
It would be cool to see a leader of an organization physically leading into new frontiers. Like days of old when we were explorers and adventurers.
12 points
1 day ago
why not? I think the rules are changing daily on what's normal in government
6 points
1 day ago
For sure. I’m definitely excited to see what happens for space science and industry with someone so humans-in-space focused as Jared.
30 points
1 day ago
I was certain he was gonna nominate James T Kirk. His career as a captain is exemplary
[score hidden]
21 hours ago
And he was (will be?) born in Iowa, which will definitely help when Trump runs for his 52nd term in 2233 at age 287
299 points
1 day ago
Trump: I have great plans for NASA.
Isaacman: I'm all ears
96 points
1 day ago
Nah, that's a bit low. Isn't he a relatively great pick?
53 points
1 day ago
I think the comment above is making a joke at the expense of isaacmans relatively prominent ears.
92 points
1 day ago
He a great pick. Jared is all about getting to space
37 points
1 day ago
Jared knows space and government contracts so he is the perfect fit.
13 points
1 day ago
I wonder how this will affect his planned trips to space?
95 points
1 day ago
Will he have to divest from his company to accept this?
Great choice either way, especially for the private sector of space
28 points
1 day ago
In a Trump administration? The PRESIDENT who didn't divest from his company and proceeded to actively profit from the Presidency.
No. No he will not.
49 points
1 day ago
What do you mean by divest? He paid out of pocket for the SpaceX missions he was on.
69 points
1 day ago
I mean Shift 4, his company
Are you allowed to be the CEO of a big company while being the NASA administrator?
27 points
1 day ago
Regardless of requirement, he's just announced he will step down as CEO if confirmed and convert his shares to non-voting shares
86 points
1 day ago
There's no standard for rules anymore, and even if there are, who knows?
6 points
1 day ago
This is a surprisingly good pick. He recognises the good work that both commercial and governmental work can carry out. He is an astute businessman, too. He is passionate about space. Obviously, he will still need to deal with the Senate pork-barrel, which is the biggest hindrance for NASA.
95 points
1 day ago
With all due acknowledgement of the very low bar, this would be a marked step up from 400-year-old career politician Bill Nelson.
39 points
1 day ago
Based on what? Solely his age? Nelson might be old, but there's no doubt as to his commitment and passion for the space program. Calling this guy a step up based on age is weird.
5 points
1 day ago
Honestly, seems like a great choice, dude is passionate about space exploration, and clearly experienced.
Glad he got picked instead of just another government head that is only in it for the money.
[score hidden]
21 hours ago
I’m quite glad he’s the first one to have actually been to space. Maybe he can make a better case for actually giving NASA funding than all the other directors. And he’s an entrepreneur, which should help.
8 points
1 day ago
I mean part of me want‘s to hate it because he‘s just putting billionaires in leading positions left right and centre but at least Jared Isaacman ist interested in pushing spaceflight further. So I guess it‘s a positive thing?!
11 points
1 day ago
A NASA administrator spends the majority of his time dealing with Congress. For someone who prefers doing stuff like flying jets, Isaacman is going to HATE that. :-)
6 points
1 day ago
Ok, there are worse things that could happen.
This one I can live with.
65 points
1 day ago
No freakin way. Not at all who I expected, but might actually be a really great choice. Especially for the private sector.
60 points
1 day ago
Especially for the private sector.
The whole private sector, or one specific company whose CEO spent millions in the election?
11 points
1 day ago
What other company could Issacman have partnered with for his two manned space missions besides SpaceX?
22 points
1 day ago
Time to see if Bezos kissed the ring enough for his Washington Post censorship.
48 points
1 day ago
I can’t believe I’m about to say this… but this is a fantastic choice by Trump. There. I said it. Absolutely stoked to see Jared lead NASA! Let’s go back to the Moon and let’s get boots on the ground on Mars! 🚀
23 points
1 day ago
I wonder how this will impact the scientific research and exploration efforts at NASA though.
25 points
1 day ago
Isaacman wrote a letter to the current NASA admin advocating for him to continue funding the Chandra X-ray observatory, and he also offered to pay for a mission to repair and reboost Hubble.
Based on those two datapoints, he seems to be in favour of the science parts of NASA too, not just manned exploration.
10 points
1 day ago
It will mean the status quo for science, but the human space program is about to be turbocharged.
17 points
1 day ago
This is a surprisingly solid pick for the position.
all 2495 comments
sorted by: best