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

Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 107 posts

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#31

Post by Revolutionisto »

Revolutionisto wrote: post #27
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm excited by such news, let's not jump from "things we don't understand" to "god/magic/aliens". For now, it's "cool event we don't know how to explain". Good enough. Life is full of that and if we try to force label on it, we miss the fun of figuring out what's going on seriously.

I certainly can’t explain exactly what it is. However, a few facts stand out: 1. Detected object moves erratically at high speeds, with exceptionally high acceleration. Controlled translational and angular acceleration of the object occur in the footage. 2. Navy pilots in both encounters reported that the object was not visible at close range but only showed up on radar, in particular only on radar that was recently…

Also, there’s that one quote...“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” or something along those lines.

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#32

Post by timwaagh »

Mirioron wrote: post #6
pmoriarty wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know what's a tragic waste for me? Most of the US military budget, its spending on the War on Drugs, its tax cuts to billionaires and corporate welfare. Let's cut those in half and talk again about SETI, which I would be happy to fund a hundred times over if it meant less killing, fewer unjust incarcerations for victimless crimes, more economic equality, and less concentration of money and power in the hands of t…

I think it isn't so easy to say that what the US military does is a waste of your money. A lot of US foreign policy is about "free trade" that's beneficial to the US. If you were to cut off the US military then you'd likely have consequences for global trade. Perhaps you're right that it's a waste of your money, but I think that this is not at all a straightforward conclusion. Eg imagine if Iran just decided to stop…

The Iranian navy is mostly famous for its usage of rubber dinghies. That's not a serious threat that needs 10 supercarriers to counter. If they decided to change that, then no problem, nobody wants the strait blocked so it will be easy to find allies to pressure the iranians into a deal. The panama canal doesn't need that either. It should be in range of US based aircraft. Current US spending can only be justified by pursuing multiyear wars, occupation of territory halfway around the world, complete domination of the seas, the ability to fight a war on two fronts (and win), the ability to obliterate earth ten times over and guarding others borders (thanks, by the way). I'd say a military the size of spain's would be sufficient given a more basic definition of security needs.

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#33

Post by anewhope »

melling wrote: post #23
RobertoG wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debt is different from deficits. I suppose you mean "trillion dollar debt". Note that deficit could be (or not) inflationary, but debt is the accumulate of money already spent in the economy.

No I think he does mean trillion dollar deficit. The US deficit is over $1 trillion a year. The debt is over $23 trillion.

There’s something fascinating about the previous comment. A knee-jerk rejection of the scale. I immediately suspected that commenter hails from somewhere in Europe. The scale is way different here, and in online communities that is often lost as people talk past each other. I think when solving problems there is benefit in thinking about what happens at several different scales.

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#35

Post by RobertoG »

anewhope wrote: post #33
melling wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I think he does mean trillion dollar deficit. The US deficit is over $1 trillion a year. The debt is over $23 trillion.

There’s something fascinating about the previous comment. A knee-jerk rejection of the scale. I immediately suspected that commenter hails from somewhere in Europe. The scale is way different here, and in online communities that is often lost as people talk past each other. I think when solving problems there is benefit in thinking about what happens at several different scales.

It was certainly a knee-jerk reaction and totally my fault. I see the concepts of debt and deficit so frequently mixed that it's already in my muscle memory.

Your knee-jerk reaction was half right, by the way: I'm somewhere in Europe where billions and trillions have different meaning.

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#36

Post by onetimemanytime »

rs23296008n1 wrote: post #25

The US hasn't even stabilised its environment, healthcare and any number of other important areas of basic human needs. Money for finding extra-terrestrial life would be better spent on earth fixing the mess. Or use it to get us to mars. At least that fits with a "plan B" since humans existing "only on earth" is still a bad idea. Same goes for moon exploration / asteroid mining. Good ideas. Raw resources shouldn't be…

>>The US hasn't even stabilised its environment, healthcare and any number of other important areas of basic human needs. Money for finding extra-terrestrial life would be better spent on earth fixing the mess.

USA spends more on healthcare than (prob) anyone else. Basic needs will never be solved, as the yardstick will also move.

>>Money for finding extra-terrestrial life would be better spent on earth fixing the mess.

Let's say that USA decides to spend $100-$500 Million a year on extra-terrestrial stuff...that's a rounding error in a $4.746 trillion budget.

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#37

Post by BiteCode_dev »

Revolutionisto wrote: post #27
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm excited by such news, let's not jump from "things we don't understand" to "god/magic/aliens". For now, it's "cool event we don't know how to explain". Good enough. Life is full of that and if we try to force label on it, we miss the fun of figuring out what's going on seriously.

I certainly can’t explain exactly what it is. However, a few facts stand out: 1. Detected object moves erratically at high speeds, with exceptionally high acceleration. Controlled translational and angular acceleration of the object occur in the footage. 2. Navy pilots in both encounters reported that the object was not visible at close range but only showed up on radar, in particular only on radar that was recently…

Such a line of thoughs lead to people attributing thunder to zeus thousands a year ago.

It's not bad to say "we don't know".

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#38

Post by basementcat »

Revolutionisto wrote: post #27
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'm excited by such news, let's not jump from "things we don't understand" to "god/magic/aliens". For now, it's "cool event we don't know how to explain". Good enough. Life is full of that and if we try to force label on it, we miss the fun of figuring out what's going on seriously.

I certainly can’t explain exactly what it is. However, a few facts stand out: 1. Detected object moves erratically at high speeds, with exceptionally high acceleration. Controlled translational and angular acceleration of the object occur in the footage. 2. Navy pilots in both encounters reported that the object was not visible at close range but only showed up on radar, in particular only on radar that was recently…

Pilots have been observing similar phenomena for many decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo_fighter

Re: Astronomers want public funds for intelligent life search

#39

Post by ianai »

aSplash0fDerp wrote: post #12

I crunched for years on seti@home at the turn of the century and have always been a fan of the project. It makes sense to increased research funding now that they have a long list of newly discovered planets to target, but what other scientific endeavors do they retire to open up any meaningful government funding? With trillion dollar deficits in the forecast, earmarking new money does not sound like an easy task to…

Ok so I’m calling bluff on the trillion dollar deficits hyperbole. This is a cudgel argument used without any deep exposition against $subjectiveBadIdea.

We live in a financial world where banks magic up funds all the time and nobody bats an eye, but governments can’t do it for projects?

Further, imagine trying to calculate the added GDP for all of a nations infrastructure over the years its existed and been in use for free or near free. Yes, there are taxes levied in fuel transactions, but clearly that’s not the entire value added.

Edit-Deficit hawks are really arguing against deficits in the secret search for forcing the economy to be zero-sum and punitive. Governments job is to create and reinforce property rights, amongst other things. They do that by creating a resource allocation system - thankfully capitalistic for the most part. Capitalism only exists at this scale with currency - that only the government authenticates. Etc etc. The governments debt is a reflection and indicator of the value its left in the market. Back to nap time.

Post reply on HN