642
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

India just landed on the Moon for less than it cost to make Interstellar | The Independent::undefined

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] SGG@lemmy.world 234 points 1 year ago

Why is this even a comparison? India only went to the moon, interstellar had to go to other freaking solar systems and a black hole to make their documentary!

[-] XTornado@lemmy.ml 50 points 1 year ago

With humans aswell and robots!

[-] blackluster117@possumpat.io 4 points 1 year ago

Robots with feelings! Do you know how many consecutive milestones they nailed?

[-] CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world 90 points 1 year ago

Cool.

The average income in India is 25x ish less than that of the US. If we scale the $75 million cost to land on the moon by 25 times, we get $1.8 billion. The Perseverance rover's cost is estimated at $2.75 billion and that thing landed on Mars.

It's incredibly impressive that India has landed on the moon on their 2nd try. Nothing should take away from that, and India should be very proud of their achievement. But geez this is a braindead article. Yes, poorer countries can pay people less do the same amount of work as someone in another country.

[-] dejf@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago

I respectfully disagree with you. It's a bit misleading to compare average incomes like that. I would assume the income disparity is nowhere near as large for valuable scientists and engineers working for a national space program. In addition, you are only comparing labour costs. Some materials can be cheaper in India, but certainly not by a factor of 25 and certainly not all of them. Therefore, I wouldn't say the article is braindead.

[-] Pregnenolone@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

This comparison is predicated on every part of the manufacturing process occurring in each country. As soon as India are buying parts from other countries they’re not paying India prices anymore

[-] MyDogLovesMe@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

Some guy at NASA: “We estimate that the cost of this part should cost 1.8Million dollars. “

Some guy in India: “You know, my cousin can make that part for 35 dollars”

These titles are dumb.

"NASA's 1969 moon landing was with a computer that can't even power Doom!"

[-] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 27 points 1 year ago

Did you know scientists created ways to use crabs as logic gates?

Someone calculated we need about 8 billion crabs in order to run Doom.

[-] zavivo@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

Now that is scientific fact. There’s no real evidence for it, but it is scientific fact.

[-] wuddupdude@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago

That's a crab fact.

[-] Blackmist@feddit.uk 2 points 1 year ago

Now you're talking Nonce Sense.

[-] Player2@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 year ago

Pretty sure that was the amount to store the files for the game, not actually run it.

[-] DudePluto@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

They did surgery on a grape

[-] HellAwaits@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

"India's Moonventure: When Bollywood Met the Lunar Blockbuster"

[-] Munkisquisher@lemmy.nz 39 points 1 year ago

Yeah but interstellar went to a black hole and back

[-] wabafee@lemm.ee 39 points 1 year ago

Aside from different approaches I think the biggest factor is salary difference. Still impressive though a good example for other Asian nations.

[-] Amaltheamannen@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 year ago

Modern US space projects are also basically welfare programs for aerospace companies.

[-] wahming@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

Can we not have the hundred identical stupid jokes in the comment section like we did in reddit?

[-] SlowNoPoPo@lemm.ee 52 points 1 year ago

It's a human thing not a Reddit thing

[-] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

How dare people have fun

[-] marmo7ade@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Can we not compare a science fiction film about traversing entire solar systems and fucking time travel to landing on the...moon?

[-] orizuru@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 1 year ago

Bollywood should start filming on-site.

[-] TurboDiesel@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

Nah. The bad CGI is what makes it so so good

[-] anlumo@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago

But consider the low gravity dances!

[-] HikuNoir@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Some houses cost less than Indian space agency spent on getting to the Moon? That must be a typo right?

[-] afunkysongaday@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago

Yes and it's incredibly annoying to me. More. Some houses cost more than Indian space agency spent on getting to the moon.

[-] Decoy321@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I mean, it's still a valid sentence. Some houses do cost less. We're just defining the word some so loosely it's almost insulting.

[-] sugarfree@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago
[-] vreraan@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But Interstellar had a box office of $715 million.

The astronautics is a very expensive sector and with completely uncertain returns on earnings.

this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2023
642 points (94.3% liked)

Technology

58143 readers
4205 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS