Germany turned off instruments being used on a joint project that si currently at Lagrange 2. This in turn resulted in Russia shutting down the project completely.
This is hardly "nothing happened". Perhaps you should have "wasted time" and read it...
Extreme scifi-level scenario: could the Russians commandeer the ISS and use it as an impactor weapon on US or Allied soil? My guess not; super hard to do, and impact doesn't release that much energy anyway. Any space expert opinion?
ISS has many components with different drag ratios and would break up unpredictably upon entering the atmosphere, making it impossible to aim reliably.
This is a big part of the difficulty in decommission planning for the ISS in general.
A more plausible scenario is Russia refusing to bring back American astronaught, Mark Vande Hei and leave him stranded on the ISS to find another way home - at least according to this article. [0]
But seriously, what science to fund is political, and I hardly think this topic is out of scope for an editorial in a venue where science policy matters so much to the audience
That's become a fact that much of science is funded from geo political factions. the further atomic combustion development is certainly a great example. it doesn't mean all science is, nor should be. you make it sound like the purpose of science research is to pursue particular political pursuits. and by doing that you are implicitly endorcing this view.
A reminder of significant science discoverers through history: Pythagoras, Archimedes, Aristotle, Da Vinci, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Plank, Bohr, Einstein.
one could hardly see a trend of politically funded or motived pursuits. what (most of) the greatest scientists have in common is that they researched and pushed science further on the name of science, most weren't funded politically, quite the opposite, some were in strict opposition with political status quo and were impeded by it.
I would agree that modern "science" has been for a large part corrupted by monetary gains, hijacked by private enterprises, governments, and (mis) guided by such. It may have always been so, all the future generations get to see is what's left of it, the skimmed gems that anyhow gets out of the few brilliant minds of the entire humanity.
It doesn't imply we should make it seem normal nor a desirable. Science in it's millenia long history, what it accomplished and the figures who accomplished it, their background, affiliation and funding (or lack of) isn't reflective of our current model. that is what my parent comment tries to highlight. Even Science magasine, one of the most respected journal, is increasingly discrediting itself by publishing politically heavy articles and headlines.
they could have kept this article apolitical, the title instead is so politically heavy it is borderline click bait or a tone of a state press conference statement.
down votes is only a reflection, what science has turned into is even being swallowed as legitimate even by one of the most technically educated fringe of our society. The HN readers.
war is one potential consequence of political struggles. Debates, PR, propaganda, votes, are political positioning and actions that may promote and justify war, or condemn, sanction, and pressure for the end of it.
commenting, debate, PR, propaganda, votes in reaction to war is again political pursuits to shape the outcome of war. I'm pointing at the Science article, which is tainted by aspects of the second category. I'm not commenting on the war itself. politics isn't just arguments in parliament, parliament debates are public, procedural executions of democratically formed institutions. politics take place far beyond, swallow in the media, educational institutions, the private sectors, and now even our retired grand mom who is prompted to take a side, perhaps by sending donations via platforms she's recently discovered how to use.
the politics of this is very sad. there isn't a single country on earth whose politics are "correct". but cooperation is always, always better than division. turning off instruments because they were made in another country? its insane. what does that accomplish? science, and in particular all the sciences related to space, must transcend that. i mean, these countries blowing each other up, they sell each other the weapons.. but we cant share a telescope? :(
It isn't a question of political nuance, Russia is murdering an entire nation. With no cooperative option currently existing to end it. I am heartened that the world is resisting on as many non violent fronts as possible.
Opinions like yours always baffled me. You probably think that taking away McDonald's from an average Russian is somehow unfair and accomplishes nothing, right?
The whole point of this huge exercise in global isolation of an aggressor country is to change that whole country's behaviour and deter others from doing the same. And before you say it's Putin - no, it's not. It's him and the millions who wholeheartedly support him.
Since we can't invade Russia to stop the aggression this is the next best thing we got.
I love how both comments make hilariously wrong assumptions about my nationality. What people like you are saying and suggesting is deeply insulting to my ancestors and historical objectivity.
I'm Polish. When I was growing up (in communist Poland) I spent a lot of time around the elderly who experienced the worst from the Soviets and got plenty of first-hand accounts of how uncivilised that nation is.
Have you heard of Katyn, where they murdered our whole intelligentsia and the majority of Polish military officers?
Have you been told about how Soviet soldiers took pleasure in raping the mother before the fathers eyes and their 8 children? Looting and burning the whole farm just for fun, maybe? Did you know about that? Putting whole families on cargo trains to be taken deep into Siberia to be starved and worked to death?
This was not done by a single man.
This happened because Russian nation historically never had problems with aggression and violence towards their neighbours. You can blame it on tyrannical systems of government but at its core its the people.
Tell me you can easily imagine that in this day and age the French or the Brits become a totalitarian country and start invading their neighbours.
We both know this is impossible because of those nations' deeply held values.
Russian mentality is very different from the rest of the Europe and you may not like it but that's the reason why they have always been a bad neighbour.
Some source material for you so you know what we're talking about here. Be warned these are disturbing videos
Post-Installation Disabling. It's like John Deere for space parts...
"And a German astronomy team, led by the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, switched off a German-built instrument on the Russian astronomical observatory Spektr-RG halfway through its planned observations."
Does anyone else find this rather concerning, and in some ways quite petty? I realize people are taking hard lines on these events. So don't sell them any more, but switching off post-install? Perhaps they do some sort of processing for the data? I have no idea. The article is quite vague.
I am absolutely delighted that the world at least seems to slowly be approaching a point where invasions will not be tolerated. I am an American and I hope that if we ever aim to invade a country again that the world will shut us down even harder than we have Russia. Stop exploding children, if your government aims to explode children, eliminate your government. Quit pretending to be concerned about the telescope.
I am from autocratic country Belarus, and over years I actually came up with, maybe unpopular, opinion that it is good to forcefully impose democracy on other countries. Please do it on my native country.
Because after some point, autocratic government goes against people's will, and can even resemble occupation of its own nation. Like literally 3% of the population repress the other 97%. All means of overturning the government and are violently suppressed at their roots.
And what would you say if your family gets blown to bits in the process? They already "saved" for example Iraq with hundreds of thousands dead, unknown amount of maimed / starved / displaced / otherwise ruined and with not much different state of affairs for the average folk in the end. You think that barely surviving farmer gives a shit whether they allowed to scream "our president is a dick" on central square?
> Almost everyone would choose freedom over anything else, even if it costs their death.
The history of tyrannical governments suggests that not “almost everyone” would choose that. Franklin's famous quote wouldn't be noteworthy if trading essential liberty for even temporary safety wasn't the common choice of most people through most of history.
This is a false statement. People value quality life and happy life. If your statement was true, there would be no autocracy.
Ukrainians do because they got support from the EU, as well as the US. If they stopped supporting, you know .... And, it is good that the EU and US are supporting Ukrainians. And, I hope the EU will support other countries, that are victims of the US.
Ukrainians protested heavily and violently when there was fraud during presidential elections, and they effectively deposited the president who usurped the chair while not being legally elected.
The protests were large, insistent, and sometimes life-threatening for the participants. There was no major support from outside, except moral support.
When people trust that they are right, and, importantly, a large number of other people around them share the same commitment, they keep on fighting.
If Russia ever occupies large parts of Ukraine, they'll face fierce guerilla warfare. Much like the Germans faced during WWII on the same territory, much like the Soviets faced on westernmost parts of it after WWII. Traditions are there.
We know Russia and Oligarch are fraud. But, don't undermine the fact that Ukraine is one of the corrupt country in Europe. So, I highly doubt if your first statement is correct. If you look on history, US has constantly meddled with anther's country affair in name of "democracy" and liberalism". However, I don't know how much US has influenced in Ukraine that makes Putin anxious.
Its a premature thinking that Ukraine citizen will start guerilla warfare? Can they live in cave like Taliban? Can they sacrifice life? There are many questions that needs to be answered.
Russia will probably install some Yes-man, who is obsequious to Putin. I don't think they intend to take whole Ukraine.
I have lived under autocracy as well as democracy. There is no difference. I realized democracy is not black magic that solves all the problems. Many people think autocracy just converted to corrupt bureaucracy. And, the corruption has increased and spread more rapidly.
Democracy is better due to freedom. But, there is no such big influence on poor man's life, unless there is a radical change like we see in South Korea.
I have lived also under a somehow despotic regime (a "light" version, Eastern Europe) and as a child it was quite strange for me that adults said differerent things in "kitchen" and in the open.
Also fun fact, each citizen was allowed to buy only limited amount of certain "things". E.g. one coffee per person (I was standing in a queue as a child to have one more coffee bag for my family) - meat was given not for money but for a piece of paper (rest of the meat was sold/gifted to our big brother Russia).
In democracy I can complaint about prices of food (which I can buy for money, not some allowance) and can complain about current rulers. I can complain about Russia - this was not allowed earlier.
And I can learn English in school (if would be born a year earlier the only option was Russian).
In my country there was a radical change in poor man's life when switching to democracy. (of course there were complainers - basically those that were subsidies by the previous regime, mostly farmers I presume)
I was born in USSR and lived and worked there until I've moved to Canada in 1992. While I and many others hated various restrictions on freedoms I know from the experience that the majority of the population was mostly concerned about living standard.
The problem is they can't invade your government, which is an idea, they can only invade your neighborhood, a place. Look what is happening to Ukraine or what happened in Iraq, that is what war is like there's nothing democratic about it.
There's a big difference between democracy and political chaos. I went through all 90s in Russia - believe me, there were so many freedom and democracy around, that no one in modern America could ever imagine :) Despite all of that, all things around were so bad, that people turned to Putin's stability with great relief.
Agree. The saddest stories are the people who did still fight for it despite 98% indiffirent nation.
It's easy to fight for something when everyone you know does too. But it's much much harder to fight multiple battles at the same time: at work, at home with you family who wants some security, etc.
South Korea I think also was autocratic at some point, but with the help of USA became much better. There's still a ton of problems, corruption and nepotism, but it's still thousands times better than dictatorship.
At least we'd have a chance of making it work. With status quo it's just becoming worse and worse due to brain drain (all active conscious people find a way to leave the country).
I can't agree enough about invasions being bad. You acknowledge the issue with the US so I'll abstain from Pot-Kettle analogies. Although, I would ask that your awareness of current conflicts the US is engaged in actually become part of your radar. If what you claim you want to happen you truly want to happen, you would acknowledge that those negative repercussions should be happening right now because we have never stopped violently interfering in other countries and their affairs. We're literally dropping bombs as I type this. So check your false pearl-clutching and feigned concessions.
I'm not 'pretending' to be concerned about the telescope. I am absolutely concerned about the progress of things that work to unite us instead of dividing us. Based on your previous comment you should be as well.
Thanks for just avoiding the issue I raised and attacking me though. Functional discourse at it finest here on HackerNews.
I think if anyone has proven anything here, it is Russia and Russia alone.
Getting upset at Germany for cancelling some scientific cooperation in response to literally invading a sovereign country and shelling civilian cities is, just, absurd.
This is only acceptable if they weren't going to share it with the international scientific community. Otherwise we're just shooting ourselves in the foot.
It's not as if the Germans just sold the Russians some instruments they then decided to switch off after the fact:
This was an ongoing joint mission where the Max Planck institute was responsible for parts of the ground support - see https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2315138 for some of the details.
You're talking about the U.S. invasion of Iraq, right? Where the Shock & Awe campaign killed ... between 0 and 6600 civilians [0]? Where 188k+ have died in the 19 years since the Neocons invaded [1]?
This is whataboutism. Obviously the war in Iraq was a terrible mistake and tragedy, but that doesn't give anyone carte blanche to do equally terrible things.
The next super power will be whoever dominates space.
It's too bad the west a d Russia can't combine tech and expo to ensure that China doesn't dominant space. At least the harder road is still an option if we choose to take it.
Hard to imagine the Russian space programme recovering from this war.
Collaboration with NASA and the other non-China space agencies was the only way to keep the domestic Russian programme going. Going it alone in a future of North Korea-like economic / technological / political / financial isolation? I guess it is possible but hard to see it right now. Sad end for a country that has done so much for human space exploration
They don't lack expertise but they will be lacking money and access to some specialised components and assemblies in the future. That said I doubt they're going to abandon their space program. I guess their launch platforms will remain stagnant and focus R&D money on things that are vital for them, like anything related to the new nuclear weapons race.
> Hard to imagine the Russian space programme recovering from this war.
The Russian space program never recovered from the fall of the Soviet Union. The sanctions and international outrage surrounding the Ukraine invasion, combined with the development of less expensive launch options that relieved everyone’s reliance on the Soyuz launch platform, mean everyone can stop propping the whole thing up.
I suppose that once the regime changes, the international support may very well return.
Looking at the low-efficiency, high-cost warfare Russia is now waging I suspect that the regime is brittle, and lacks talented people willing to work for it. Some more capable forces may replace it relatively soon, naturally or violently.
I worry about potential retribution from the Russian side if provoked by the US. America is, after all, wholly dependent on Russia to return astronaut Mark Vande Hei safely to Earth later this month. I don’t want this to happen, obviously but according to this article they have already threatened as much. [0]
82 comments
[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 143 ms ] threadDid you read the article?
This is hardly "nothing happened". Perhaps you should have "wasted time" and read it...
more info on the above that was in fact mentioned in the OP article. https://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Russia_stops_deliveries_o...
This is a big part of the difficulty in decommission planning for the ISS in general.
Also, why would they ever want to? They have far more precise and effective weapons.
It sounds like a good plot for a call of duty game though!
[0] https://www.pennlive.com/nation-world/2022/03/russia-threate...
But seriously, what science to fund is political, and I hardly think this topic is out of scope for an editorial in a venue where science policy matters so much to the audience
A reminder of significant science discoverers through history: Pythagoras, Archimedes, Aristotle, Da Vinci, Copernicus, Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Plank, Bohr, Einstein.
one could hardly see a trend of politically funded or motived pursuits. what (most of) the greatest scientists have in common is that they researched and pushed science further on the name of science, most weren't funded politically, quite the opposite, some were in strict opposition with political status quo and were impeded by it.
I would agree that modern "science" has been for a large part corrupted by monetary gains, hijacked by private enterprises, governments, and (mis) guided by such. It may have always been so, all the future generations get to see is what's left of it, the skimmed gems that anyhow gets out of the few brilliant minds of the entire humanity.
It doesn't imply we should make it seem normal nor a desirable. Science in it's millenia long history, what it accomplished and the figures who accomplished it, their background, affiliation and funding (or lack of) isn't reflective of our current model. that is what my parent comment tries to highlight. Even Science magasine, one of the most respected journal, is increasingly discrediting itself by publishing politically heavy articles and headlines.
they could have kept this article apolitical, the title instead is so politically heavy it is borderline click bait or a tone of a state press conference statement.
down votes is only a reflection, what science has turned into is even being swallowed as legitimate even by one of the most technically educated fringe of our society. The HN readers.
Here is what the crew of the international space station was doing one day after US ground forces entered Iraq:
https://www.nasa.gov/centers/johnson/news/station/2003/iss03...
The whole point of this huge exercise in global isolation of an aggressor country is to change that whole country's behaviour and deter others from doing the same. And before you say it's Putin - no, it's not. It's him and the millions who wholeheartedly support him.
Since we can't invade Russia to stop the aggression this is the next best thing we got.
I can't put it in words any simpler than this.
I'm Polish. When I was growing up (in communist Poland) I spent a lot of time around the elderly who experienced the worst from the Soviets and got plenty of first-hand accounts of how uncivilised that nation is.
Have you heard of Katyn, where they murdered our whole intelligentsia and the majority of Polish military officers? Have you been told about how Soviet soldiers took pleasure in raping the mother before the fathers eyes and their 8 children? Looting and burning the whole farm just for fun, maybe? Did you know about that? Putting whole families on cargo trains to be taken deep into Siberia to be starved and worked to death? This was not done by a single man.
This happened because Russian nation historically never had problems with aggression and violence towards their neighbours. You can blame it on tyrannical systems of government but at its core its the people. Tell me you can easily imagine that in this day and age the French or the Brits become a totalitarian country and start invading their neighbours. We both know this is impossible because of those nations' deeply held values. Russian mentality is very different from the rest of the Europe and you may not like it but that's the reason why they have always been a bad neighbour.
Some source material for you so you know what we're talking about here. Be warned these are disturbing videos
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t3hukp/phone_camer...
And the aftermath:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/t2ihg8/russian_inv...
A few more so you maybe people like you can wake up...
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/t1yuau/eyewi...
https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/t9fmf7/russ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/t14gi4/russ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/t0kzln/russ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/taf8t1/russian_sol...
"And a German astronomy team, led by the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, switched off a German-built instrument on the Russian astronomical observatory Spektr-RG halfway through its planned observations."
Does anyone else find this rather concerning, and in some ways quite petty? I realize people are taking hard lines on these events. So don't sell them any more, but switching off post-install? Perhaps they do some sort of processing for the data? I have no idea. The article is quite vague.
Because after some point, autocratic government goes against people's will, and can even resemble occupation of its own nation. Like literally 3% of the population repress the other 97%. All means of overturning the government and are violently suppressed at their roots.
And what would you say if your family gets blown to bits in the process? They already "saved" for example Iraq with hundreds of thousands dead, unknown amount of maimed / starved / displaced / otherwise ruined and with not much different state of affairs for the average folk in the end. You think that barely surviving farmer gives a shit whether they allowed to scream "our president is a dick" on central square?
The history of tyrannical governments suggests that not “almost everyone” would choose that. Franklin's famous quote wouldn't be noteworthy if trading essential liberty for even temporary safety wasn't the common choice of most people through most of history.
I am officially asking for source material to back your "almost everyone" assertion.
Ukrainians do because they got support from the EU, as well as the US. If they stopped supporting, you know .... And, it is good that the EU and US are supporting Ukrainians. And, I hope the EU will support other countries, that are victims of the US.
The protests were large, insistent, and sometimes life-threatening for the participants. There was no major support from outside, except moral support.
When people trust that they are right, and, importantly, a large number of other people around them share the same commitment, they keep on fighting.
If Russia ever occupies large parts of Ukraine, they'll face fierce guerilla warfare. Much like the Germans faced during WWII on the same territory, much like the Soviets faced on westernmost parts of it after WWII. Traditions are there.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2021/oct/03/revealed-anti-o...
Its a premature thinking that Ukraine citizen will start guerilla warfare? Can they live in cave like Taliban? Can they sacrifice life? There are many questions that needs to be answered.
Russia will probably install some Yes-man, who is obsequious to Putin. I don't think they intend to take whole Ukraine.
It is nice to say that if you live in a country where you have freedom.
Democracy is better due to freedom. But, there is no such big influence on poor man's life, unless there is a radical change like we see in South Korea.
I have lived also under a somehow despotic regime (a "light" version, Eastern Europe) and as a child it was quite strange for me that adults said differerent things in "kitchen" and in the open.
Also fun fact, each citizen was allowed to buy only limited amount of certain "things". E.g. one coffee per person (I was standing in a queue as a child to have one more coffee bag for my family) - meat was given not for money but for a piece of paper (rest of the meat was sold/gifted to our big brother Russia).
In democracy I can complaint about prices of food (which I can buy for money, not some allowance) and can complain about current rulers. I can complain about Russia - this was not allowed earlier.
And I can learn English in school (if would be born a year earlier the only option was Russian).
In my country there was a radical change in poor man's life when switching to democracy. (of course there were complainers - basically those that were subsidies by the previous regime, mostly farmers I presume)
That's not a rhetorical question, I'm dead serious. They have way more chances to stay well and alive during a war, than during the occupation.
It's easy to fight for something when everyone you know does too. But it's much much harder to fight multiple battles at the same time: at work, at home with you family who wants some security, etc.
I'm not 'pretending' to be concerned about the telescope. I am absolutely concerned about the progress of things that work to unite us instead of dividing us. Based on your previous comment you should be as well.
Thanks for just avoiding the issue I raised and attacking me though. Functional discourse at it finest here on HackerNews.
Today, Germany has proven they can’t.
Getting upset at Germany for cancelling some scientific cooperation in response to literally invading a sovereign country and shelling civilian cities is, just, absurd.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spektr-RG
This was an ongoing joint mission where the Max Planck institute was responsible for parts of the ground support - see https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2315138 for some of the details.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe#Casualties
[1] https://www.IraqBodyCount.org/analysis/reference/press-relea...
Where GWB joked about having tricked the Country into doing the Neocons' dirty work [2]?
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/mar/26/usa.iraq / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWD6pGQCwM8
I don't trust the media to be honest about what's actually happening in Ukraine.
the word should get you warned to stop dismissing valid comparisons.
ironically, whataboutism was an intentionally misapplied fallacy popularized by the russians.
The Rwandan government (since we're pointing out random countries misdeeds to apparently „excuse“ the Russin invasion?) did a genocide once, too!
It's too bad the west a d Russia can't combine tech and expo to ensure that China doesn't dominant space. At least the harder road is still an option if we choose to take it.
Because?
If you have that you can build an empire.
Collaboration with NASA and the other non-China space agencies was the only way to keep the domestic Russian programme going. Going it alone in a future of North Korea-like economic / technological / political / financial isolation? I guess it is possible but hard to see it right now. Sad end for a country that has done so much for human space exploration
The Russian space program never recovered from the fall of the Soviet Union. The sanctions and international outrage surrounding the Ukraine invasion, combined with the development of less expensive launch options that relieved everyone’s reliance on the Soyuz launch platform, mean everyone can stop propping the whole thing up.
Looking at the low-efficiency, high-cost warfare Russia is now waging I suspect that the regime is brittle, and lacks talented people willing to work for it. Some more capable forces may replace it relatively soon, naturally or violently.
I guess it depends on what “generally” means, but the Ukrainian conflict already changed that in 2014 AFAIK: https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukraine-crisis/crimea-catc...
[0] https://www.pennlive.com/nation-world/2022/03/russia-threate...