Live data from Hacker News

Lichens can survive almost anything, and some might survive Mars

arstechnica.com

11–12 of 12 posts

Re: Lichens can survive almost anything, and some might survive Mars

#11

Not mentioning Kim Stanley Robinson's The Mars Trilogy is insane. Almost "didn't bother to google the topic" insane. Screw the article; it's a worthless wrapper around a single quote by one of the authors of the actual paper[0], which is also far less stimulating than KSR (although I'm sure very validating to us KSR-heads!). just go find some of the best hard sci fi you'll ever find (and hundreds of pages loving devo…

R G B Mars But what about (AM)OLED, and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PenTile_matrix_family ? Did you read his "The Years of Rice and Salt" btw? I've found this to be more entertaining, though less epic. Just one paperback of slightly alternate history, showing how arbitrary things come to be and are.

The Years of Rice and Salt is amazing, very vivid characters, and (SPOILER) it's amazing how he ties in multiple lifetimes.

Shaman is another one I'd recommend.

Re: Lichens can survive almost anything, and some might survive Mars

#12
post #10

Not mentioning Kim Stanley Robinson's The Mars Trilogy is insane. Almost "didn't bother to google the topic" insane. Screw the article; it's a worthless wrapper around a single quote by one of the authors of the actual paper[0], which is also far less stimulating than KSR (although I'm sure very validating to us KSR-heads!). just go find some of the best hard sci fi you'll ever find (and hundreds of pages loving devo…

The use of the word 'insane' is a bit strong of you don't mean disrespect. I do support your enthusiasm for the topic and applaud your critique of the article. But your argument seems to be: the authors didn't pay much respect to the science, in favor of clickbait; they should've read work of fiction instead. I cannot asses how scientifically accurate Kim Stanley Robinsons' writing is, but he's a doctor of literature…

> The use of the word 'insane' is a bit strong of you don't mean disrespect.

I'm insane, too. All the best people are.

> But your argument seems to be: the authors didn't pay much respect to the science, in favor of clickbait; they should've read work of fiction instead.

I am definitely not making an argument for anything. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. I'd rather have my teeth ripped out than get roped into a good-faith argument with a stranger from VC culture.

> I cannot asses how scientifically accurate Kim Stanley Robinsons' writing is, but he's a doctor of literature rather than a astrobotanist.

WHAT?! Why didn't anyone tell me?

Post reply on HN