POURNE@MIT-MC@sri-unix (09/11/82)
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE at MIT-MC> The gentleman who declined to renew his membership is welcome to his opinion. Others have different views. Ones with different views on the L-5 Board include Heinlein, Kantrowitz, and a number of aerospace managers like Gordon Woodcock of Boeing. Some with different views who are members include astronauts and company presidents (Fred Haise of apollo 13 was guest of honor at the L-5 convention last spring; Hans Mark of Nasa was keynote speaker). Re: SSI of Houston and "rational approaches." I am not certain I understand what engineering contribution launching a miniuteman upper stage makes as opposed to trying to develop a cheap liquid rocket. Certainly using a minuteman upper stage is more rational if all you want to do is get your rocket off the pad and have it splash in the Gulf of Mexico instead of scaring the alligator. Gary Hudson who did the Percheron was at the World SF convention recently and we had a long discussion about the "new" and the old SSI approaches. It may be the new approach is "more rational" as said in the recent space digest, but it is not utterly obvious.
MINSKY@MIT-OZ@sri-unix (09/11/82)
From: Marvin Minsky <MINSKY at MIT-OZ> The Pro-Space organizations have different goals and foci, so they are not equivalent. L-5, for example, is particularly interesting to me because its board aspires to make space colonies happen some day. I regard that as important, not just for scientific reasons but because I'm dubious that high-tech humans can survive on one planet throughout the current transition from pre- to post-technology. Probably members of the Planetary Society also share such concerns as individuals, but not so much in their highest level organization goals, which emphasize science. L-5's national meeting did indeed have a high technical content, and was attended by space-involved people of large influence and imagination. I am on L-5's board because it attracts technical people interested in projects like starship design and practical colony-launching schemes. Also, the different space clubs may also reflect different political orientations. This may affect your preference for what to join. My priority is to make it feasible that some humans survive the forthcoming possible disasters, and because one can't predict what politics will evolve in the colonies, I don't consider that aspect so important. In the long run, "better live than dead". -------