India just landed on the Moon for less than it cost to make Interstellar | The Independent::undefined
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.
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.
I prefer Interstellar.
Overrated movie. I’ll take real science and progress any day over imaginary nonsense that’ll never happen.
A world with only “real” science and progress but without any entertainment would be quite boring.
And fiction has been key to inspiring the next generation of scientists/engineers. So many NASA people have claimed to be inspired by Star Trek just to pick one.
Can we not have the hundred identical stupid jokes in the comment section like we did in reddit?
Let’s also get rid of complete transcription of short videos while we’re at it. Everyone else saw the video, no need to quote every part
Transcription is usually something done for deaf people. Like people transcribing memes for the blind.
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!
Yeah but interstellar went to a black hole and back
