I’ve been worried about this for a long time, because there’s no obvious (at least to me) answer: How do we prevent them from becoming weapons? And not just weapons of war, but of domestic assassinations?
I agree with much of this, though I do think that Scott has always mischaracterized SLS as a useful national capability. My biggest problem with it is phrase "space exploration." It's pretty clear that getting back to the moon has never been a national priority, and isn't today.
Until we decide why we're going back to the moon, we can't come up with a sensible idea of how to do it. If we do a prize, it shouldn't be to just get back, but to set up a demonstrably economically sustainable infrastructure, not for "exploration," but for lunar development.
That is, the prize should be for (e.g.) maintaining a base at Shackleton of at least two dozen people for five years. That's the only way to avoid another flags and footprints event (and it's something that cannot be done with anything resembling NASA's current plans).
So let the Shelbys of the world continue to massively waste taxpayer money as the danegeld to allow us to offer a much smaller amount, risk free, to do something useful (since clearly getting back to the moon is not and has never been nationally critical).
My former Rockwell colleague (and current business associate) Dallas Bienhoff has a survey of all the planned new on-orbit systems, including a brief description of my planned intraorbital infrastructure.