It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth • Hacker News Board

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#151

Post by zxcmx » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:05 PM UTC

jschwartzi wrote: post #117

ButWhatFor wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Came here to say this - this has been the difficulty with things like science and research since the dawn of time... you study one thing and then hopefully if you have a lot of people studying multiple things one hugely amazing thing eventually falls out when one person gets lucky. It leads to a very delayed gratification despite very real near term costs. So it’s easy to attack the costs and focus and prioritization…

It's also a tool to pacify people with empty promises of a better future. The way that it's being used as a distant future utopia is like the way promises of Heaven are used in Abrahamic religions to convince people to suffer in the here and now. A lot of people would choose to suffer some now in order to go to some peaceful space colony where they don't have to live with any of the consequences for our biosphere. Th…

We could "spin" the anti-space side as a religion too I suppose. It involves a bit more ascetism and self-flagellation though.

I already live in a "heavenly" future compared to most of my ancestors.

I have hot and cold running water. My waste is whisked away. I can travel far and harness powerful energies with the flick of a switch. I can summon almost any food or item imaginable to my doorstep. I can open a portal to anywhere and speak with people there. There are still mysteries however, and the human body is rich with them.

There is a growing sense that using our powers comes at a terrible cost.

Many feel that the only solution is to abstain, although some factions believe that we can "purify" our technology.

Because the problem, filtered through the human psyche, is seen as a moral one. That it's _wrong_ for so many things to be too easy. Ten dollars shoes, drive-thru fast food and plastic bags must be evil because anyone can see it's absurd that these things are even possible.

Naturally, developing new powers (such as space exploration) would come with more terrible costs, and this must be stopped until we address our sins here on earth.

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#152

Post by deepnotderp » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:06 PM UTC

"The Wright Brothers should stop wasting their time trying to make airplanes and donate their meager dollars to "

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#153

Post by natch » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:07 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #110

macspoofing wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The future of humanity is not only on earth. Where are you going to go? Outside of Earth, there is no place for us in the entire Solar System. Sure we may build some research stations here and there, just as we did in inhospitable places on Earth (like Antarctica), but there's no long-term option anywhere. Interstellar travel is science fiction, but even if it wasn't, there is no place for us to go as well.

We can change Mars in large ways. Lots of stuff written about that. Heck, we could redirect an icy asteroid to collide, providing water, atmosphere and heat. On the order of decades from now.

Agree with you but keep in mind we can also change humans to be better suited to the environment there. So in the long term we can work both sides of the problem.

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#154

Post by machiaweliczny » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:09 PM UTC

dreamcompiler wrote: post #98

It's at least 10x harder to build a human-staffed base on the Moon than to build one at the bottom of the ocean. And it's 10x harder still to build one on Mars. (And that's optimistic; those numbers probably need more zeros.) Likewise Level 5 self-driving cars. Every level is at least one more zero on the hardness multiplier. Neither is gonna happen soon. They will happen some day, and none of this means we shouldn't…

Why do you think moon is harder than bottom of the ocean?

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#155

Post by Retric » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:09 PM UTC

kwhitefoot wrote: post #147

Retric wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self sufficient requires a manufacturing base to include everything needed to sustain it’s self, including redundancies. Going from zero humans on mars to 100’s of millions is a massive bootstrap problem with minimal incentive for the the people involved or the multiple years worth of earth’s GDP to get to that point. It’s like the “self replicating” 3D printers where they can produce 98% of the structure by weight a…

Why does it need hundreds of millions of people?

That’s not a requirement, that’s the goal. In theory you could have a self sufficient base with 0 people and AI, or 100,000+ people for long term genetic diversity and an automated wonderland, or ...

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#156

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

phizy wrote: post #135

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That thinking is about a decade out of date. The number of expolanets that are in the habitable zone grows geometrically. Some think every star has some planets. Simple chance makes it possible to find agreeable destinations nearly everywhere. And 'evolutionary adaptation' is irrelevant. We can change ourselves (are changing ourselves) genetically already. That will only increase. The result will be a species more ad…

A decade out of date? It'll take you 30,000 years to reach the nearest star at the rate of the fastest moving object ever constructed by man. If anything any of us are talking about are able to be out-of-date in a mere decade, the whole premise of this discussion is flawed beyond measure. All of the resiliency that you've seen in life is due to the fact that the environments to which we're adapted are uniform. Oceans…

Not a single correct thing in that, I believe! Life on Earth has evolved to live in hundreds of dissimilar environments. Heavy salt is toxic, yet fish manage the ocean. Yellowstone has life in mud pots at hundreds of degrees. Air doesn't exist underground yet bacteria thrive there. Hell, there are living things on the surface of the space station.

To get people to tolerate more salt, we'd have to have a fish's ability to regulate it. Ok, genes for that. Air issues? Filters, microstructures to migrate particulates out, baffles (like many creates already have). Deep-ocean pressure? Only a couple of issues there, and certainly life thrives at the bottom of the ocean.

It's not optimism; its simple observation of what we have already on Earth in existing life forms.

And 30,000 years changes not a thing. The log of 1 Trillion base 2 is 39. In 40 generations of space colonization, that's 40 times 30,000 times however long it takes to rebuild the capability on each colony. In a dozen million years the galaxy would be covered. Its 20B years old. So, nobody's tried it yet.

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#157

Post by bryanlarsen » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

kwhitefoot wrote: post #147

Retric wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self sufficient requires a manufacturing base to include everything needed to sustain it’s self, including redundancies. Going from zero humans on mars to 100’s of millions is a massive bootstrap problem with minimal incentive for the the people involved or the multiple years worth of earth’s GDP to get to that point. It’s like the “self replicating” 3D printers where they can produce 98% of the structure by weight a…

Why does it need hundreds of millions of people?

Elon's estimate is that 1 million people are needed for Mars to industrialize sufficiently to become self-sufficient.

A good reference is Casey Handmer's blog or book.

https://www.amazon.com/How-Industrialize-Mars-Strategy-Self-...

https://caseyhandmer.wordpress.com/2020/08/23/progression-of...

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#158

Post by eindiran » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:10 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #143

jupp0r wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think would prevent a self sufficient colony on Mars in a few hundred years? I don't see any fundamental obstacles to it.

Self sufficient requires a manufacturing base to include everything needed to sustain it’s self, including redundancies. Going from zero humans on mars to 100’s of millions is a massive bootstrap problem with minimal incentive for the the people involved or the multiple years worth of earth’s GDP to get to that point. It’s like the “self replicating” 3D printers where they can produce 98% of the structure by weight a…

> [Y]ou need to accept [that] everyone on Mars [will] live in relative poverty for generations.

I think this point is by far the easiest one to address. Historically, there have always been people willing to do dangerous things (ie exploring the Arctic / Antarctica). I don't think you'd have any trouble finding people willing to give up their Earth lifestyle for a chance to explore the "frontier" even with the knowledge that they couldn't come back.

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#159

Post by JoeAltmaier » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:13 PM UTC

macspoofing wrote: post #115

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can change Mars in large ways. Lots of stuff written about that. Heck, we could redirect an icy asteroid to collide, providing water, atmosphere and heat. On the order of decades from now.

>We can change Mars in large ways. No we can't. The gravity of Mars is always going to be a problem. The lack of magnetic field is always going to be a problem. Most of its atmosphere was lost to space and there is not enough water on the planet to replenish. >we could redirect an icy asteroid to collide, providing water, atmosphere and heat. I read the Mars trilogy too. >On the order of decades from now. Sure.

Blood pressure, bone growth are managed by genetics. Which we (will) have control over soon. So that's hardly a stumbling block.

Re: It’s dangerous to think humans have a destiny outside Earth

#160

Post by zanny » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:17 PM UTC

brundolf wrote: post #69

kstenerud wrote: post #10

> Indeed, the idea that technological developments will solve all of our problems —eventually allowing us to leave Earth — is instrumental to political mobilization on behalf of the powers that be. It helps to perpetuate the current socio-economic system that is designed for the one percent to stay in power and the working class to stay working. Sorry to say, but almost EVERYTHING big that happens on this planet help…

I agree that they made some big leaps when turning this into a narrative, but I think there's truth to the basic premise that focusing too much on a hypothetical future amongst the stars - which at best would be harsh, difficult, and miserable - serves as a distraction against the very real and very urgent and very solvable problems facing our species and habitat as it exists right now. Even if we managed interstella…

> It's just that it's a very long-term and theoretical value, and at this particular moment in history there are much more pressing concerns.

Like blowing up people living in mud huts in deserts going by US economic priorities. A regime largely in place to protect biased trade relations for cheap materials and goods from around the world and more importantly (to those orchestrating the regime) to the line the pockets of select defense contractors.

Investments in space represent, what, .1% of the US GDP? Astoundingly the single mother raising her kid in food scarcity in actually probably really doesn't give a hoot about terraforming in 2500, but would really give a damn about having healthcare and avoiding societal collapse from climate catastrophe in her lifetime.

A lot of unreasonably rich people are unreasonably obsessed with space, but thats largely because they are sociopaths. Thats how they got rich in the first place, or were born to such extreme luxury they are psychologically impaired to be unable to relate to anyone outside their class meaningfully. So they go full scifi because they don't think the world we have with all its problems not so easily solved by throwing money at them (that isn't for their own immediate personal gain) is worth it.