Live data from Hacker News

Where did all the starships go?

datawrapper.de

231–240 of 369 posts

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#231

Realistic Hard SF has to deal with Accelerating Change making technology vastly powerful yet still limited. The hardest thing to write about is cognitively enhanced humans or any other entities (AI, aliens, etc.) exceeding human cognitive limits. JW Campbell famously said it couldn't be done, but without that depictions of the future or wider universe fall flat. Vernor Vinge became the master of such SF and showed se…

Speaking of hard SF with imagination, Hal Clement's "Mission of Gravity" is a good example.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#232

It's far more practical to adapt life to space and other planets, than it is to adapt space and other planets to human life. The problem with writing a story about artificial life exploring the universe is that it's unrelatable without humans in it. I think humans are stuck on earth permanently because there are no other environments in the solar system we can live in as easily as earth. Traditional sci-fi explained…

Our trajectory is to meld ourselves with machines. Fleshy humans may he stuck on earth but our machines have no such restrictions and can be engineered for all kinds of extremes. We will eventually figure out how to imprint our consciousness into a chip. Maybe not for another thousand years but weve been building machines our entire existence to conquer nature. We will figure it out.

If there's not a constant stream of consciousness throughout the entire process, I'm just assuming that's gonna be nothing more than a copy. What else could it be? When "you" wake up, it'll be 100% convincing either way, so I assume you can only prove it going in. I'm not great at philosophy though.

Edit: biology is pretty efficient though. We might as well just start growing new bodies/parts for people, enhancing it over time. There are already functionally immortal species on Earth.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#233
post #11
post #7

The starships left with the optimism. In the 50s there was a greater demand for stories with an unconstrained vision of the future where growth and expansion amount to flourishing. Later generations that lived in the excesses of growth saw it as the source of an intensifying dystopia. They stood athwart history and demanded decelleration. Star Trek lost ground to Terminator, Foundation to Neuromancer. Escaping sidewa…

I still find myself quite taken by some sci-fi writing. Iain M Banks works, Rajaniemi, and Joan Slonczewski. The “problem” is that they are not popular the way Harry Potter or isekai are.

I’m also a fan of Banks - but he’s hardly current. He died thirteen years ago.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#235
post #15
post #7

The starships left with the optimism. In the 50s there was a greater demand for stories with an unconstrained vision of the future where growth and expansion amount to flourishing. Later generations that lived in the excesses of growth saw it as the source of an intensifying dystopia. They stood athwart history and demanded decelleration. Star Trek lost ground to Terminator, Foundation to Neuromancer. Escaping sidewa…

Also, we've realized the scientific reality that traveling faster than light is likely impossible, and the vast distances to other habitable planets would mean tens of thousands of years of travel even with the most efficient technology. Interstellar space is also hostile to life, and any life present at the destination will not use the same DNA coding for protein (if gene expression even works that way). We also do…

Optimistic views of the future see those as problems that can be solved, which helps the consumer engage with the story.

Pessimistic views see those as insurmountable problems that shouldn't be bothered with, making the stories seem more ridiculous.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#236

It's far more practical to adapt life to space and other planets, than it is to adapt space and other planets to human life. The problem with writing a story about artificial life exploring the universe is that it's unrelatable without humans in it. I think humans are stuck on earth permanently because there are no other environments in the solar system we can live in as easily as earth. Traditional sci-fi explained…

I always appreciated the Mobile Suit Gundam approach (U.C. timeline, to be specific): humans in space largely live in O'Neill Cylinder-style space colonies arranged in constellations at Earth-Moon Lagrange points, allowing them to a) be built from materials gathered from space and b) once built, manufacture things from those materials without having to land them on Earth first. There are large settlements on the Moon, and while they are important manufacturing and research centers, they're not the primary population centers in space. Mars is, to the best of my knowledge, uninhabited. As far as the outer solar system goes, only Jupiter has a permanent human presence as the primary source of humanity's helium-3 (Gundam predates the proposal of mining the Moon for helium-3 instead).

I like this approach. It's plausible based on the assumptions made by the story, lets people in space have the benefits of mostly-normal gravity and radiation exposure (as compared to, say Mars), and keeping things local to the Earth means you don't need to be too concerned with the distances involved. Where they really lose the plot, though, is with population; Gundam claims that, in less than 100 years, billions of people--in fact, the large majority of humanity--have moved to space. I can't even begin to fathom what kind of effort would be needed to build that many space colonies, and then shuttle the people up there to populate them.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#237

It's far more practical to adapt life to space and other planets, than it is to adapt space and other planets to human life. The problem with writing a story about artificial life exploring the universe is that it's unrelatable without humans in it. I think humans are stuck on earth permanently because there are no other environments in the solar system we can live in as easily as earth. Traditional sci-fi explained…

I don't think we'll ever populate a planet beyond the solar system, but I think at some point we'll leave Earth. The sun has an expiration date, after all. Maybe the space-flotilla species was the most accurate outcome after all, Mass Effect!

Warhammer 40,000 did it earlier with the Aeldari Craftworlds, and Battlestar Galactica did it before that.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#238
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interstellar space contains neutral hydrogen atoms. Hitting a spaceship, they would produce electromagnetic radiation. When the collision speed goes past about 0.25c, the radiation becomes hard gamma rays which are dangerous to living things, and cannot be efficiently shielded against. At this speed, the time dilation is slightly above 3%, so you're still not going to reach even Alpha Centauri in one human lifetime,…

Right, we are never leaving. We should get comfortable here, and take better care of the only habitable planet, rather than doing insane things and justifying that as "Don't worry, we'll make Mars habitable" and other silliness.

Life cannot leave, no.

A radiation hardened, self healing computer could.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#239
post #7

The starships left with the optimism. In the 50s there was a greater demand for stories with an unconstrained vision of the future where growth and expansion amount to flourishing. Later generations that lived in the excesses of growth saw it as the source of an intensifying dystopia. They stood athwart history and demanded decelleration. Star Trek lost ground to Terminator, Foundation to Neuromancer. Escaping sidewa…

This doesn't explain why pessimistic and dystopian sci-fi has declined. Also, Foundation takes place in a future where society is about to collapse and regress into dark ages. It's a borderline dystopian world.

YA Dystopia novels probably had a hand in that. They almost certainly sucked all the air out of the genre, and it’ll take a long time for serious authors to see a viable path forward with publishers with anything that vaguely resembles them.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true, but stop to consider all the things we ARE doing... * Space Station that lasts 25 years * 3,000 satellites providing Internet Service * Mars rovers that run for 10+ years * Flying helicopters on Mars

> Space Station that lasts 25 years A small station, hosting a small number of people, orbiting very close to the surface of the Earth. > 3,000 satellites providing Internet Service …very close to the surface of the Earth. > Mars rovers that run for 10+ years On the closest planet to Earth that our equipment can survive on. Notably, we have nothing but melted slag on Venus. > Flying helicopters on Mars On the closest…

The Kurzgesagt video on teraforming Venus is interesting. It only takes a thousand years, assuming perfect execution.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G-WO-z-QuWI

Post reply on HN