Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

livescience.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 120 posts

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#61

Post by throwaway76543 »

cortic wrote: post #54
throwaway76543 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not speculation. I have a cite: literally the entire progression of human history and societal development. Steady (and in the last century, enormous) progression toward more leisure time, with more wealth and latitude at our disposal than ever before. UBI is good. You're going to fund UBI by working for other people.

Having a system to enriches the few who don't need more wealth reinforced by impoverishing the many is better than chattel slavery and worse than a system which offers real choice and ownership of ones labor.

You appear to have a twisted understanding of both economics and human history.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#62

Post by cortic »

windows_tips wrote: post #59
cortic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

..in your opinion. But in reality the current system doesn't work and needs constant massive bailouts and public funding R&D to just barely operate for the minority.. The entire point of the current economic system is to motivate the masses to enrich the few. If the motivation goes away then maybe people will work to enrich their own lives.

>But in reality the current system doesn't work and needs constant massive bailouts and public funding R&D to just barely operate for the minority.. Says an HN comment.. Maybe try to rework this sentence, because it doesn't appear to be true. While things may not be excellent for everyone, clearly the "system" works to some extent. >The entire point of the current economic system is to motivate the masses to enrich t…

>Maybe try to rework this sentence

The current state of our market system requires massive bailouts and massive funding into research and development, massive subsidies (e.g. arms), and an overworked and underpaid workforce to limp along and pay out a healthy dividend to the richest(few) investors.

>source on this?

Just look at any multi billion dollar company; whats the difference between shareholder payout and worker payout? How else would you define this system where a company can declare hundred million dollar profits while paying minimum wage?

>Do you seriously not think that people work to enrich their own lives right now?

We try. for the last 8 hours i worked to make money that would enrich my life, but my work made someone else a hundred times this amount so 1% of my last 8 hours was for me.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#63

Post by tomrod »

hueving wrote: post #52
cortic wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just speculation, what system are you imagining in place of 'wage labour'? chattel? I imagine UBI and an explosion in the sciences; When anyone with interest can afford to follow that interest.

UBI doesn't work because it depends on people working to fund it. The amount of money required for poverty level UBI in the US (one of the richest countries) is more than all of the federal current tax revenue, which comes from working people. We can't all decide we are going to live for free and magically still get to drive cars, live in houses, eat food, have running water, etc. The entire point of the economic sys…

UBI currently exists, it's level is just 0,if you don't count existing community welfare programs.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#64

Post by cortic »

throwaway76543 wrote: post #61
cortic wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a system to enriches the few who don't need more wealth reinforced by impoverishing the many is better than chattel slavery and worse than a system which offers real choice and ownership of ones labor.

You appear to have a twisted understanding of both economics and human history.

maybe. History shows me that, unregulated, our system makes kings and queens that own not only own land and wealth but people as well.

If i wanted to make a system that insured the absolute minimum advancement and progress, the absolute maximum misery and poverty, while giving a random few almost god like powers..

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#65

Post by rfrey »

throwaway76543 wrote: post #36
cortic wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just speculation, what system are you imagining in place of 'wage labour'? chattel? I imagine UBI and an explosion in the sciences; When anyone with interest can afford to follow that interest.

No, it's not speculation. I have a cite: literally the entire progression of human history and societal development. Steady (and in the last century, enormous) progression toward more leisure time, with more wealth and latitude at our disposal than ever before. UBI is good. You're going to fund UBI by working for other people.

How are you measuring leisure time? My impression is that great gains were made in the union heyday of the 40s-60s, but that leisure time for most workers has been declining since then. The move to almost universal dual income households means outside-work time is spent doing the stuff that used to be done during the day. Also many more people have a second job. I’d be greatly heartened by data showing leisure time had increased in, say, the last 50 years.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#66

Post by pc86 »

tomrod wrote: post #63
hueving wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI doesn't work because it depends on people working to fund it. The amount of money required for poverty level UBI in the US (one of the richest countries) is more than all of the federal current tax revenue, which comes from working people. We can't all decide we are going to live for free and magically still get to drive cars, live in houses, eat food, have running water, etc. The entire point of the economic sys…

UBI currently exists, it's level is just 0,if you don't count existing community welfare programs.

> UBI currently exists

I mean if we're willfully misinterpreting what UBI is to prove a worthlessly pedantic point, sure.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#67

Post by throwaway76543 »

cortic wrote: post #64
throwaway76543 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You appear to have a twisted understanding of both economics and human history.

maybe. History shows me that, unregulated, our system makes kings and queens that own not only own land and wealth but people as well. If i wanted to make a system that insured the absolute minimum advancement and progress, the absolute maximum misery and poverty, while giving a random few almost god like powers..

See, that's what I'm talking about.

What history actually shows is that humans have steadily moved away from barbaric structures such as owning people. Primarily through the construction of societies built around the notion of private employment.

Your working assumptions are gross distortions of reality.

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#69

Post by lucasdwi »

callesgg wrote: post #68

So what is the definition of aurora that causes it to not also encompass Steve.

"Steve does not contain the telltale traces of charged particles blasting through Earth's atmosphere that auroras do. Steve, therefore, is not an aurora at all"

Re: Eerie Skyglow Called 'Steve' Isn't an Aurora, Is 'Completely Unknown' to Science

#70

Post by antonvs »

nnq wrote: post #46
tomaskafka wrote: post #33

> At about 200 miles (300 km) above Earth, the air inside Steve blazed about 5,500 degrees Fahrenheit (3,000 degrees Celsius) hotter than the air on each side, and moved about 500 times faster. This band of hot, surging gas was about 16 miles (25 km) wide. My bet is that it's a trace of a weapon. Propulsion trail? High energy laser hotspot?

> has been a familiar night phenomenon for decades does't really fit with your theory...

It's obviously part of the ongoing was against the Moon Nazis.
Post reply on HN