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

Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 140 posts

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#31

Post by vacuity »

delichon wrote: post #2

> I propose that we all agree to ban all permanent lunar development that is visible with the naked eye from Earth. ...with no proposal to weigh the value of the development against against the value of good taste or nebulously defined compassion. To suppose that no such development with greater value is possible betrays a poverty of imagination. IMHO it is authoritarian to constrain the actions of others on the basi…

I think the author agrees on valuing agency, seeing as they call for agreement rather than forcing it on everyone. Unless you suppose that a populace and legislature can agree, but, say, a newborn in that territory has not given agreement. I think such matters are entirely orthogonal, and your remark about agency is disingenuous or not thought out. The matter at hand is whether agency directed towards beauty and compassion outweighs agency towards whatever values this development appeals to. The author ignores the latter, which I agree is folly, so I would like a more balanced discussion here.

For my part, I similarly value the aesthetics of an unblemished moon. I believe the development camp primarily values greed ("an inordinate desire to acquire or possess more than one needs") and I find that unbecoming. Note that I view the developments to be unnecessary (at least in the current context). It really is just aesthetics otherwise, for both camps.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#33

Post by vacuity »

fsckboy wrote: post #22
vacuity wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

human pollution kills millions a year? the only thing reducing the human population is decreased desire to have children by people who can afford them. Otherwise, more people are born, live longer, and die than ever before.

> Air pollution accounted for 8.1 million deaths globally in 2021 [0]

> In 2019, air pollution caused about 6.7 million deaths. Of these, almost 85% are attributable to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), including ischemic heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and diabetes. This makes air pollution the second leading cause of NCDs globally after tobacco. [1]

[0] https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/air-pollution-accounte... [1] https://www.who.int/news/item/25-06-2024-what-are-health-con...

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#34

Post by Miraste »

delichon wrote: post #2

> I propose that we all agree to ban all permanent lunar development that is visible with the naked eye from Earth. ...with no proposal to weigh the value of the development against against the value of good taste or nebulously defined compassion. To suppose that no such development with greater value is possible betrays a poverty of imagination. IMHO it is authoritarian to constrain the actions of others on the basi…

How far would you take this? That rhetoric taken to its conclusion leads to travesties like destroying national parks to install oil wells and strip malls, a net negative for 99.999999% of humanity.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#35

Post by olddustytrail »

WalterBright wrote: post #12

> so why not agree to leave it unmarred by any obvious act of humanity, forevermore? How some people hate humanity. Personally, I'd love to see the lights from a lunar colony on the moon. This reminds me of the people who don't want to "pollute" Mars. Sheesh, it's a dead rock. There is no environment to pollute. It could desperately use people on it, just like the moon. The solar system is ours, and we can and should…

You have no idea whether Mars is a dead rock or not. Even if it now is, you have no idea whether it used to be alive or not.

So no, we shouldn't just dump random crap on Mars based on your ignorance.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#36

Post by vacuity »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #24
vacuity wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

> we, as humans who have privilege and comfort, deserve to continue and expand those qualities Cutting down forests for farms asserts a human privilege. Arguing for colonies on the Moon or Mars isn't asserting a human privilege, it's arguing for a biological one: the privilege the living should enjoy over the non-living.

Are you saying that farmland production is unnecessary (at least at its current rate) but spce colonies aren't? If your concern is that humans need the latter to live, shouldn't the former be justified too? Is the Earth too doomed for the former to work? I don't follow.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#37

Post by mulmen »

fsckboy wrote: post #22
vacuity wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

human pollution kills millions a year? the only thing reducing the human population is decreased desire to have children by people who can afford them. Otherwise, more people are born, live longer, and die than ever before.

An unborn hypothetical baby is not a human death.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#38

Post by freejazz »

WalterBright wrote: post #12

> so why not agree to leave it unmarred by any obvious act of humanity, forevermore? How some people hate humanity. Personally, I'd love to see the lights from a lunar colony on the moon. This reminds me of the people who don't want to "pollute" Mars. Sheesh, it's a dead rock. There is no environment to pollute. It could desperately use people on it, just like the moon. The solar system is ours, and we can and should…

> desperately

I don't think those floating rocks have any urgent needs at all.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#39

Post by vacuity »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #20
vacuity wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

Why not both populate Mars and improve earth? I dont think they are mutually exclusive.

I would be (grudgingly) fine with populating Mars if I felt that we as a race were remotely trying our best to improve Earth. By opening up Mars, incentives are wrong and we will probably become even more lax.

Re: Bury me on the moon, preferably on the far side

#40

Post by freejazz »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #20
vacuity wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it an act of hatred to say that humans shouldn't expend huge amounts of effort and energy to try to populate Mars so that humans can escape the very human act of polluting the Earth? When this human pollution kills millions a year and plenty of other organisms? Is it a celebration of humanity to continue buying chocolate or clothing or rugs, even if they are clearly the result of exploited or downright slave labor…

Why not both populate Mars and improve earth? I dont think they are mutually exclusive.

One of those is actually an urgent need. The other one presupposes any utility at all, let alone the massive leap in technology required to solve the other problem.
Post reply on HN