Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars • Hacker News Board

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#471

Post by lisper » Thu, Jul 26, 2018, 10:41 PM UTC

K0SM0S wrote: post #470

lisper wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For any exploratory drilling, or covering any real amount of ground, you need humans. No, you don't. > For reference, Opportunity Rover has only traveled 45 km/28 mi in 14 years. That's true, but that is because of budgetary constraints, not technical ones. If you put the same amount of money into a rover as it would take to send a human, you could cover a LOT more ground with autonomous rovers. This is self-eviden…

> I used to work on the Mars Rover program. I just need to thank you for that and hope that you're still somehow involved in making us a more-than-one-planet species. I don't really care whether it's another planet, a space station or whatever else can ensure our survival past this beautiful blue aqua ball. On topic, there is no debate that robotics is the key to exploring space, magnitudes of orders faster and farth…

I left NASA almost 20 years ago, in no small part because I came to the conclusion that trying to "make us into a more-than-one-planet species" is a fundamentally misguided goal. This is not to say that I do not believe in the value of space exploration. I absolutely do. But I think it's a mistake to try to send our DNA into space. We should be trying to send our ideas into space because they are a lot more robust and flexible than our DNA. I also think that we ought to define our identities by our ideas more than by our DNA.

It is merely an accident of history (and a reflection of misguided priorities IMHO) that we developed space-travel technology before we developed AI. But that seems to be in the process of correcting itself. It has been 50 years since we landed on the moon. I predict that in another 50 years the idea that a human can do anything better than a robot in space will be as laughable as the idea that humans can play chess better than computers.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#472

Post by jibal » Thu, Jul 26, 2018, 11:49 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #447

jibal wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An oncologist wishing more money was spent on cancer? In other news, water is wet. Yeah, because only oncologists care about cancer.

Feel free to quote where I said that; or, you can continue willfully misinterpreting my sentiment.

It's called an implication. Duh.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#473

Post by andrei_says_ » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 1:10 AM UTC

tbabb wrote: post #372

henryaj wrote: post #316

Per the Great Filter[0], this is really bad news, right? [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

Everything about the Drake Equation, the Great Filter, and the Fermi "paradox" strike me as extremely sloppy logic, from which nothing but unfounded conclusions can be drawn. We have essentially zero data on the prevalence of life in the universe. There is no "absence of life" to explain, because we don't actually know whether life is absent. We more or less completely lack the scientific capability to detect extraso…

Also, we use a limited definition of “life” which seems to mean “life just like what we encounter on Earth”

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#474

Post by andrei_says_ » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 1:15 AM UTC

xelxebar wrote: post #388

tbabb wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything about the Drake Equation, the Great Filter, and the Fermi "paradox" strike me as extremely sloppy logic, from which nothing but unfounded conclusions can be drawn. We have essentially zero data on the prevalence of life in the universe. There is no "absence of life" to explain, because we don't actually know whether life is absent. We more or less completely lack the scientific capability to detect extraso…

To my mind, the Fermi Paradox isn't so much about explaining an absence of life. It's the simple observation that, if life were abundant in the universe, the naïve expectation is that we'd see it everywhere, but we don't, so what gives? Intuitively, I see it like a bunch of homemade pickles. Say we have 100 jars of homemade pickles but are not sure whether they actually picked nicely or spoiled. If we try a jar and i…

The universe is huge beyond our ability to think or imagine, and is mostly space.

We are stuck on Earth for now.

Any signs of our existence (radio waves or physical objects) have not reached much beyond the vicinity of the solar system.

We can’t detect if life exists far from us and even if we could, most of the info we’re getting is very old.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#475

Post by RaceWon » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 2:35 AM UTC

harrumph wrote: post #433

RaceWon wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course predatory mammals pioneered the West. Like all predatory mammals; we went in search of better hunting, better hunting grounds and better mates. We still do that today. Imo we will still do that 10,000 years from now... because deep down we are what we are. Edit: We're even "worse" than I gave us credit for. " https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34011026"

>We still do that today. Imo we will still do that 10,000 years from now... If we continue to glibly shrug our shoulders at the premise that mass destruction is just what we do, and if we keep pretending we have no choice in the matter, then the chance of us lasting 10,000 more years is somewhere near zero.

I believe that we can solve our problems, but only if we deal in reality. Once I hear people advancing agendas that rely on humanity pulling together as a world group to help each other for no more reason than "it's nice to do that"; well let's just say I remain skeptical.

I have the same reaction when I hear talk of Socialism. It is simply Not dealing with reality to expect people to; start a business, spend every waking hour thinking and working on that business for some years, and then give Most of the profits away to benefit unknown strangers. Who will do that? (And yes I know Gates and Buffet and others are giving most of their money away, but that's after they have already lived a life of their choosing.)

Glib, sure after a fashion, but much more than that it is a factual reply based on reality.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#476

Post by Whitestrake » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 5:00 AM UTC

thaumaturgy wrote: post #464

Whitestrake wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dismissing an argument because it's often repeated by many people sounds like you're making an argument against popularity, maybe even a fallacy fallacy. Other than the link at the end of your post, I don't think anything you said actually challenges the opposing argument.

I'm not dismissing it because it's repetitive; I'm criticizing the people that make that argument because they've been responded to over and over again, and yet they still make exactly the same argument while, themselves, ignoring the counterpoints. But okay, here are a few reasons: 1. Because it's difficult. As Kennedy famously said, we choose to go not because it is easy, but because it is hard [1]. We will need to…

> I'm criticizing the people that make that argument because they've been responded to over and over again, and yet they still make exactly the same argument

This statement might be true as a generalisation, but is probably not true for this specific instance of conversation in this thread. I certainly haven't been responded to over and over again, yet I considered making similar arguments.

I appreciate the effort you've put into your points, though - thank you.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#477

Post by jchrisa » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 5:25 AM UTC

jchrisa wrote: post #284

pc86 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An oncologist wishing more money was spent on cancer? In other news, water is wet. First of all, the optimal place for me to spend my money is not necessarily the optimal place for someone else to spend theirs. We can't know for sure, of course, but who were would have preferred Elon Musk start a cancer research firm instead of SpaceX? Secondly, there is no universal "cancer" that we can fight. There are hundreds of…

It's also worth noting that an all-out effort to help humans thrive in the harsh environment of interplanetary space might have a nice side benefit of curing cancer. Don't underestimate the power of poetry. In the 60s we used the poetics of the moon landing to fund research. This was an innovation, in that previously we could only get that kind of money together for war projects. So I see space as the poetics that sa…

Replying to a [dead] comment...

The space program was obvs a war effort. But I view war as one of capitalism's ways of managing the problem of overproduction. When we can substitute other outlets (eg space instead of war) for that part of the business cycle we should jump at the chance.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#478

Post by xelxebar » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 6:00 AM UTC

tbabb wrote: post #398

xelxebar wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my mind, the Fermi Paradox isn't so much about explaining an absence of life. It's the simple observation that, if life were abundant in the universe, the naïve expectation is that we'd see it everywhere, but we don't, so what gives? Intuitively, I see it like a bunch of homemade pickles. Say we have 100 jars of homemade pickles but are not sure whether they actually picked nicely or spoiled. If we try a jar and i…

> if life were abundant in the universe, the naïve expectation is that we'd see it everywhere, but we don't No, that's my point: We don't see it because we can't ; we don't have the technology. The fact that we see no aliens has nothing to do with the number of aliens, and everything to do with the fact that are more or less incapable of looking. It would be like saying, "if butterflies were abundant in my garden, I'…

> We don't see it because we can't; we don't have the technology.

Why are radio telescopes insuffient?

Given what we know, humans building a Dyson sphere would be pretty obvious to anyone looking, simply by the waste heat. We'd have to take specific measures to actively avoid detection. It's not even clear how that's possible, given the second law of thermodynamics.

Positing that civilizations are everywhere but hiding seems the more extraordinary claim. It just takes one "person" sending one message to Earth for the veil to be broken.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#479

Post by dang » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 7:37 AM UTC

robotrout wrote: post #187

bordercases wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LOL Seems more cost efficient long run to address lifestyle than deal with proximal consequence

OK. You tell your mom that, after she's gotten cancer, asshole. How did her lifestyle cause her cancer in her ovaries (another inflammation caused cancer), I wonder? While you're chastising your mom for her lifestyle, the rest of us will be looking/hoping for a cure. You should know that even you will experience increased and chronic inflammation as you age, no matter how much better than your mom, your lifestyle is.…

> You tell your mom that, after she's gotten cancer, asshole.

Posting like this is a bannable offense. I'm not going to ban you for this because it's clearly a personal topic, but if you post like this again, we will. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules from now on.

Re: Liquid water 'lake' revealed on Mars

#480

Post by Ultimatt » Fri, Jul 27, 2018, 8:04 AM UTC

remote_phone wrote: post #43

ryanmercer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For any exploratory drilling, or covering any real amount of ground, you need humans. For reference, Opportunity Rover has only traveled 45 km/28 mi in 14 years. A human can collect more specimens in a day than ALL of the rovers have to date. If we remove this year's launch window, you have 10 minimum-energy launch windows in the next 21 years. 2020, 2022, 2024, 2026, 2029, 2031, 2033, 2035, 2037, 2039. If we could g…

I was talking to an oncologist yesterday. Her biggest frustration is that Silicon Valley billionaires are spending billions upon billions to send things to space, when there are serious problems on Earth that could be fought, most importantly cancer. It’s hard to argue with her. $400B/yr would fund a lot of research that would benefit humanity a lot better than a coordinated mission to Mars, even though it would be v…

If you're going to Mars there is plenty of room for cancer research as part of that. Unless spending years exposed to the solar wind is fine with everyone. Plus this argument is bullshit. Why spend more on cancer when only a third or less money is spent on mental illness affecting huge numbers of younger people many of whom turn to suicide? Once you play this game we end up with the poorest of societies focussed on the very bottom of a needs hierarchy exploding a useless population.