Live data from Hacker News

The Day the Moon Blew Up

gatesnotes.com

21–30 of 115 posts

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#21

A couple of fun things hidden (or not exactly) in this video: There's no missing a couple of Neal's swordfighting buddies at 1:07. Wondering where the camera stand is? Look for its reflection in the window behind Bill at 1:52. What car did Bill drive to the meet-up? Probably not the Model X. My money is on the Porsche 959 shown at 2:17. (It's also a safe bet that the meet-up actually began at the Burgermaster, since…

Why wouldn't gates drive a tesla x?

Bill might well drive a Model X and any number of other cars -- his daily was an armored mid-90's Lexus LS for many years -- but if there's a Porsche 959 parked at the south Kirkland Burgermaster, the odds are overwhelming that it belongs to Bill.

This because only 345 Porsche 959's were ever built, and none were eligible for import into the US. That is, until Bill made himself instrumental in the passage of the show and display importation exemption* so that he could buy one.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Show_or_Display

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#22
I greatly enjoyed some of Stephenson's other works, but I was actually a bit disappointed with Seveneves. The narrative is well crafted, but unfortunately I just got stuck on the whole space ark concept and couldn't suspend disbelief enough to continue.

Maybe someone else can explain why it made sense to focus on an orbiting refuge, right in the path of the Moon's fragments, rather than dig a bunch of underground cities that would have saved many times more people.

Midway through the first unit, I basically decided they should have dug tunnels ten miles long, one mile deep at bottom, lay tracks, and just go full steam carting rocks out while digging massive caverns. They could move entire hospitals, schools, factories, labs, etc. into these places, store tons of food and supplies, lay pipes to connect to underground water supplies, set up parks, farms, and animal preserves using artificial solar lighting. Makes so much more sense to me than this nutty space station idea. And with gravity, access to minerals, oxygen, etc.

I love space as much as the next geek, but if you want to save millions of humans, you've got to dig.

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#23
The character identification bit is interesting. I had assumed the president was meant to be Hillary Clinton until I read someone angrily complaining about his take-down of Sarah Palin...

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#24
post #2

>Seveneves belongs in the subgenre of hard science fiction, which means it emphasizes scientific accuracy. Everything adheres to physical laws, so unlike Star Wars, no one travels anywhere near the speed of light. A pity then that a little basic chemistry eluded both the writer and the critic - there's no carbon on the moon. Rather difficult to support humans, and carry out feats of biotechnology, without it...

IMHO, "hard SF" has developed as a term for books that have "hard physics", everything else like biology, chemistry, sometimes even mathematics is usually lacking.

As an example: The Cheela, the microscopic intelligent life forms in the more famous hard SF Dragon's Egg, are described like eukaryotes with an eukaryotic life style, but they're so tiny that they don't need any of the complex "inventions" of eukaryotes, for example, they wouldn't need any "plumbing" in the body since they're small enough for diffusion to deliver nutrients. IRC their DNA is triple stranded; DNA is double stranded so that it's more safe from mutations as you can always read the opposite from the opposite strand, if you had a second backup in the form of a third strand you would have no stable chemical bonds between the bases. Triple helices exist but these doesn't help with stability and are implicated in transcription. Edit: Similarly, there should be massive problems in the later communication because the Cheela shouldn't have a base 10 mathematical system as they don't have 10 fingers, you could still display it as base 10 but there has to be a conversion (see https://www.quora.com/What-does-one-mean-by-Every-base-is-ba... ).

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#25
post #2

>Seveneves belongs in the subgenre of hard science fiction, which means it emphasizes scientific accuracy. Everything adheres to physical laws, so unlike Star Wars, no one travels anywhere near the speed of light. A pity then that a little basic chemistry eluded both the writer and the critic - there's no carbon on the moon. Rather difficult to support humans, and carry out feats of biotechnology, without it...

That was covered at least in passing. The comet they capture and use to reach the Cleft provides the sources of carbon and other elements that are hard to get. Presumably long enough to build and launch slow missions to capture and redirect other sources (happens 'off screen').

> "The black stuff has all kind of goodies on it. Carbon, obviously. But also nitrogen, ptoassium---" "Micronutrients," Markus said, "that the Cloud Ark will be needing."

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#28

boy-being meets girl-being beneath silvery moon, which then explodes for no adequately explored reason.

What do you mean? They thoroughly explained it -- it was an agent!

It's a reference to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. (In particular, what the band Disaster Area's songs are about.)

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#29

My theory about the book, and the reason why there's such a tone change at the end is that this book is the kickoff to a much larger cycle. If it is, I think there's an authorial question -- when do you shift gears to the far future, and how? It makes some sense to me that readers might find the style transition jarring between volumes. Also, some of the cool stuff starts to happen later. So, perhaps -- hopefully --…

A larger cycle would be outrageous! Maybe it's just my imagination, but I'm guessing that there's some connection to Anathem. Or even to that immortal alchemist/cryptographer.

Re: The Day the Moon Blew Up

#30
post #17

The first third of Seveneves is a real gut punch. The only other world-ending story that comes close in terms of emotional impact for me was Arthur C. Clarke's "Childhood's End". Stephenson manages to show humanity in all its realistic messiness but still leave you proud -- on balance -- that humans mostly get our act together in a desperate attempt to preserve a seed of life and culture.

I found Childhood's End an extremely unpleasant read, and so that comparison makes it hard for me to even think about reading Seveneves. It was just so depressing, taking the concept of isolation to such an extreme it felt abusive. Or maybe I shouldn't have read it while isolated myself (literally living and working in the middle of nowhere without transportation and minimal contact with anyone I was close to).

Maybe if I'd read Seveneves without ever having heard this comparison, I would have made it through to the part that makes you proud, but at this point I doubt that's possible.

Going to skip this one, and I'd suggest everyone else skip Childhood's End.

Post reply on HN