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

Where did all the starships go?

datawrapper.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 369 posts

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#291

Post by imtringued »

WalterBright wrote: post #123
chasil wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

And yet we still have a solar system, empty of life other than Earth, we can expand to. Why try to cross an ocean when everything we could want is across the river? Two things baffle me: 1. The idea that Terran life is toxic and must not be allowed on other planets in the solar system. 2. The one person who is advancing our space faring abilities by leaps and bounds is routinely vilified and excoriated on HackerNews.

I don't really see anyone complain about Jeff Bezos these days?

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#292

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

I think that science has advanced to the point, where we no longer consider there to be “unexplored” realms, in science. We haven’t gotten there, yet, but we can see it, from here.

There’s the old adage (maybe it was Carl Sagan that said it?), that any sufficiently advanced science, appears to be magic, but we no longer think of it as “magic.” It’s just a point further down the road. More importantly, we now know about a lot of the “hard limits,” in science.

For myself, I’ve always been more of a fan of fantasy. That’s simply because I prefer the way the narrative is driven.

In Science Fiction, the real protagonist is the speculative science, and the characters are simply decorative elements. The stories are about the “grand idea” science.

In Fantasy, the stories are really about characters, in a fantastical context. The stories are about people.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#293

Post by JumpCrisscross »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #292

I think that science has advanced to the point, where we no longer consider there to be “unexplored” realms, in science. We haven’t gotten there, yet, but we can see it, from here. There’s the old adage (maybe it was Carl Sagan that said it?), that any sufficiently advanced science, appears to be magic, but we no longer think of it as “magic.” It’s just a point further down the road. More importantly, we now know abo…

> science has advanced to the point, where we no longer consider there to be “unexplored” realms, in science

It’s interesting that the last time this vividly happened was on the eve of massive technological advancement, social change and a world war.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#294

Post by imtringued »

WalterBright wrote: post #182
kentm wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He hired the private investigator before he was sued. You left out the part where he claimed a person was a pedophile and when asked if it was just an insult basically said “no I really think he’s a pedophile”, and started stating made up bullshit about child brides as fact. He only backtracked when he was sued. That is NOT the same as just throwing insults.

More nuance: "Mr. Musk made these statements based on reports he received from a private investigator he hired to investigate Mr. Unsworth in preparation for the litigation that Mr. Unsworth had already threatened. Unbeknownst to Mr. Musk, the investigator’s reports were fabricated, and the investigator himself turned out to be a convicted felon who had gone to prison for fraud." "Mr. Musk’s tweet was the culmination…

This level of defense seems highly inappropriate when you consider that the the unimpressive billionaire doesn't stoop down to this level, has a functional moon lander, ISRU technology that can manufacture solar panels on the moon and a long term plan for getting rid of SLS while the more impressive billionaire is struggling to get to orbit.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#295

Post by fragmede »

nephihaha wrote: post #273
WalterBright wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are a lot of ethical issues surrounding Neuralink and how it would be used Like what? (There are always ethical issues with new medical technology.) > It might be good for certain medical stuff Yes, like giving sight to the blind! What a monster Musk is! P.S. two of my largest medical fears are becoming paralyzed or going blind. Neuralink has promise in making these treatable. I'm all for it!

Neuralink has various potentials. One of them is that it becomes obligatory or even mandatory... If you don't get it, you'll be accused of being a luddite. It will probably start as a medical tool and progress to there. The problem is that you are giving away access to your mind, one of the last private spaces. That means your thoughts can be stolen (think AI scraping but worse), or advertising put in your dreams. Pe…

> One of them is that it becomes obligatory or even mandatory...

Given how smartphones have percolated society, I fear you may have a point, but I think that might be the slippery slope fallacy.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#296

Post by decremental »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #292

I think that science has advanced to the point, where we no longer consider there to be “unexplored” realms, in science. We haven’t gotten there, yet, but we can see it, from here. There’s the old adage (maybe it was Carl Sagan that said it?), that any sufficiently advanced science, appears to be magic, but we no longer think of it as “magic.” It’s just a point further down the road. More importantly, we now know abo…

[dead]

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#297

Post by JumpCrisscross »

delichon wrote: 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…

> starships left with the optimism

How does the Three Body Problem fit into this? On one hand, it’s Chinese. On the other hand, it’s literally mocking optimism.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#299

Post by rudolftheone »

duskwuff wrote: post #91
NooneAtAll3 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so... it might be a marketing problem? no publisher was there to tell author "wtf did you name it, you'll get ignored" or smth?

I don't think anyone's failing to recognize modern sci-fi novels because they aren't called "The Space Martians Go To The Moon In Their Starship" or whatever. Really, I think the most significant trend here is that, between 1950 and 1980 or so, the sci-fi genre grew up and stopped relying on painfully literal titles.

I’d argue that SF should never have "grown up." Look at the works considered classics today, like Heinlein, or even Star Trek. At the time of release, they were often dismissed as unserious (TOS famously had scientific blunders like planets at -290°C), yet they remain cultural touchstones because they prioritized vision over rigor.

SF used to excel at selling "dreams" to humanity. By trying too hard to be seen as "serious" or scientifically airtight, authors sacrificed the sense of wonder that allows for mainstream success. We traded mass appeal for academic validation.

Re: Where did all the starships go?

#300

Post by rudolftheone »

ralfd wrote: post #75

Because most men stopped reading and most women don’t care much about sci-fi . https://archive.is/I1QyW > Beyond the bookstore, much of the architecture of book discovery is informally targeted at women. Celebrity book clubs are mostly led by female celebrities and increasingly court women of all ages, from those who are fans of Oprah Winfrey and Reese Witherspoon to those who are more interested in the tastes of Dua…

I wouldn't blame the demographic shift on female readers; I’d blame the accountants.

The publishing industry hasn't been killed by women, but by risk aversion. Truly groundbreaking SF requires betting on bold, novel, and often weird ideas. Financial departments and algorithms inherently favor safe, repetitive patterns (like romantasy formulas). You can't simulate the next "Dune" or "Neuromancer" on a P&L sheet, so publishers stopped trying.

Post reply on HN