This feels like one of the most "in your face" scams I've seen in awhile.
The first thing I wanted to find out when I visited the site is where they got their funding - of course that section is absent from the site.
The second thing I looked up is how they expected to get there and how they were solving the engineering challenges involved. On the technology page I found a dumbed down list of the different modules involved in the launch, and on the "is this really possible?" page I got a tidbit telling me they were using solar panels and nonpressurized rovers.
The icing on the cake is the $38 application fee and the note that "The entire plan revolves around the use of existing, validated technology".
There's less than 500 people on that page. Let's be wild and assume they quadruple that to 2000 applicants. Times 38 dollars, that's less than 80000 dollars.
For that, they made an elaborate web page, did tons of PR outreach (not just on the internet; they're Dutch, and have been in Dutch traditional media a fair lot). They even got a reputable university on board (Universiteit Twente).
To scam people out of $80k?
No. They actually believe that there's a fair chance that they'll pull this off. Whether that's a sensible belief is another thing entirely, but they believe it.
You do know that they plan to finance the trip by selling TV show rights for it? Even if it miserably fails, it's great television.
Exactly my thought. They have a graphics designer on their team! Actually, I think the graphics designer is the only person who has done anything for this project so far. And those letters from SpaceX etc, that they show in the video, ha ha, a typical scam indicator. I'll rather go buy myself a couple drinks in the club with those $38 tonight.
One thing is the application fee. Second are google ads (very unrelated in my case). It would be too bad if it turned out to be a complete scam. It occurs to me that some of those people put quite a lot of effort into making their "demo" videos (not all of them are webcam presentations).
I was a little on the fence at first, but their insane timetable has convinced me it's either a scam or -- more likely -- some kind of reality TV or viral marketing stunt.
Too bad. I would like to see a serious effort to go to Mars. But that will probably come from Hawthorne, CA.
A modest processing fee isn't unreasonable. It ensures only those who are truly serious apply, and the money would help cover the many costs of this campaign.
Indeed, and when they get back, they will be going to live on a farm in the country with lots of other friendly people, water, food, etc., where they can run free... but no, you can't visit them :)
Putting aside fees and whatever, that was straight-up unpleasant. I watched about 10 videos, between recent, popular and random. I appreciate the people for submitting videos and such, but this is a serious endeavor and none of them would have a chance in a real mission. I suspect most are treating it like a vanity exercise. This felt more like a reality TV show about going to Mars. Unfortunately, seriously interested and competent folks were probably mixed into the rabble clamoring for attention.
I seriously respect the [real] folks that sign up for the eventual, one-way trip to Mars, but these seem not to be the folks. It's going to be hard. It's going to be unpleasant. And it's going to end both badly [in a sense] and gloriously. I didn't see that gravitas reflected in the folks I watched.
How could it even go to air? It would be such an incredibly deep and likely harrowing experience that it couldn't possibly be entertaining except perhaps to psychotics—and even if it was funny or something, that in itself would be absolutely horrifying. That said, I would have to see it for its depth and significance.
Elsewhere on the website, they discuss a few reasons why they think they are more likely to complete their mission than others who have attempted. Sadly, a couple of their points seem a bit iffy:
- Simple rovers – Through the use of relatively simple rovers, designed to conduct basic settlement construction prior to human astronaut arrival, saving both time and cost.
I'm not a professional aerospace engineer, but construction robots seem just a bit more complicated than picture-taking robots. (oversimplification, but you get my point.) If it's so much easier, how come robots aren't building houses here on earth?
- No new developments – The entire plan revolves around the use of existing, validated technology
The falcon heavy hasn't even been built yet, I don't know how they can say this.
From their site: "While most of the components required are not immediately available with the exact specifications required, at this time, there is no need for radical modifications to the current component designs. All suppliers have confirmed their ability to build what is required--and they can do so now."
So their meaning is that, while the specific stuff they need doesn't yet exist, the technology to create it exists. In other words, if the components were needed today, they could be built today, with existing ("validated") technology. Agreed that there's a non-trivial stretch from there to say the components themselves are validated.
In defense, it's being built right now. AFAIR SpaceX tested engines for it recently.
It's engineering. When you have a design validated "on paper" you're likely already 80% done - the rest is to actually assemble and fix problems simulations didn't catch.
I suggest that death row inmates be selected for the "Mars One" mission. These inmates are the most practiced at being forcibly confined in a hopeless environment and would be the most inspired individuals to make a death sentence into a life sentence. Australia is a de facto example.
Having read all of that I suspect it's an elaborate plot for a TV series in which they will dupe some of the applicants into believing they are going to Mars and film them in an ultra-extreme Big Brother capsule for a sustained period of time.
If I was looking for people to build the first human colony on Mars I'd want the most mentally stable, non-egotistical, discerning people on planet Earth. Precisely the last people who'd make videos of themselves and apply to be on a reality TV program.
It seems like one of the questions all the applicants are answering is "how would you describe your sense of humour?" I'd say it would have to be pretty poor to go along with this joke.
Out of these 490 submissions, 422 are men, 68 are women (you think dating on Earth is hard? Try Mars!). 164 applicants are over 30 (they will be over 40 when this trip is supposed to happen). Then again, they’ve got at least one flight instructor[1] and one person studying to become a mortician[2], so I’m sure this will work out just fine.
"Don't attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity".
I think taking application fees even when they are at least 10 years away from their goal is absurd and probably unethical, but it looks like their team has a sincere desire to make the mission happen. Its threads like this that make me wish HN was not so cynical.
From a philosophical (but also biological) point of view, sooner or later we will all die.
From an economical point of view, the Registration fee is way cheaper than a grave on the Earth :-)
I suspect most of these people won't go when the chips are down. The training, mounting stress and creeping realization that this mission is most likely suicidal will separate the wheat from the chafes.
Having said that, I have half the mind to go, but that's also why I'm not. I'm not particularly sane or stoic, and this would make me crack for sure.
I think a lot of people on here have that half mind to go (though probably not on this particular programme). This is the closest thing to the settling of the Americas ever since; it's something historically meaningful to be a pioneer. Granted, what keeps us grounded are our dreams and plans, and the fact that it's most likely suicidal.
I think that's a given. I'm sure the same thing happened for the first rockets and the first moon landings. Thank heavens they were successful, but I bet more than a few astronauts in training had doubts.
The first thing I wanted to find out when I visited the site is where they got their funding - of course that section is absent from the site. The second thing I looked up is how they expected to get there and how they were solving the engineering challenges involved. On the technology page I found a dumbed down list of the different modules involved in the launch, and on the "is this really possible?" page I got a tidbit telling me they were using solar panels and nonpressurized rovers.
The icing on the cake is the $38 application fee and the note that "The entire plan revolves around the use of existing, validated technology".