Live data from Hacker News

Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

asgardia.space

31–40 of 74 posts

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some supply chain inefficiencies you've identified?

A few... lack of standard transaction identifiers, fixed hours of business with bespoke holiday schedules, use of humans, use of telephones, physical travel to trade shows, printed literature, cold calling/emailing, manual price checks, incapacity to provide actual volume or delivery dates prior to purchase, manual pricing, non-transparent pricing, manual provisioning and re-entry of client and supplier information s…

Among these, "use of humans" stands out.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#33

How about something smaller scale like food waste. We have maybe 50-ish productive farming seasons left before soil is over taxed. If you can get locally grown food to people’s tables with minimum waste for a decent price that ensures everyone is fed that would be far more impressive than failing at Dyson spheres. Maybe we can find a way to regenerate the soil while we’re at it. That’s a hard supply chain issue and w…

> How about something smaller scale like food waste.

How bout smaller still… like maybe author starts with using ai to organizing their monthly budget, or whatever.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#34

Nice intro video on what may be realistically required to build a Dyson sphere: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pP44EPBMb8A By Kurzgesagt, all their videos are excellent and informed by the literature.

There will of course never be a Dyson Sphere, or anything even vaguely reminiscent of it.

Instead, long before anything of such a scale would be conceivable, we will have hydrogen-boron fusion for unlimited energy, and moved industrial operations out to the Kuiper Belt, where the truly valuable commodity -- cold -- is abundant.

Suns and planets are for extreme rock-banging primitives.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because "reusable rockets" got laughed at by the existing space industry doesn't mean every laughable idea is secretly feasible. "My new database will make building a Dyson sphere easy" is a slightly... loftier claim than "we can probably land rockets and reuse them".

I see what you mean, but I wasn't referring to Space X accomplishments but its ambitions. The "we can probably land rockets and reuse them" is what it delivered so far, the claimed ambitions (laughable or not) are about making humanity interplanetary.

Ambitions are free. Capability is expensive. Achievements are valuable. Ambitions do not predict achievement.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#36

I want to send something to a carbonaceous chondrite asteroid that can extract the volatiles and turn the coal-like substances and stony substances into large plastic (Kapton!) and metal films. These could be used for solar collectors, solar sails, sunshades. It pays for itself by manufacturing space sunshades to the Earth-Sun L1 point that get their own their own power. The "something" is probably a factory that bui…

Kapton requires a great deal of hydrogen to make.

L1 sunshades would cement global catastrophe, as unrestricted accumulation of CO2 would further acidify ocean shallows eliminate the base of the ocean food chain.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#37

Only by reading the plan, he reminds me of an early Elon Musk. It has the first Paypal then Space X vibe. I wonder how many other people have similar dreams, but can't deliver cause their parents aren't rich. Edit: added middle sentence

Just because "reusable rockets" got laughed at by the existing space industry doesn't mean every laughable idea is secretly feasible. "My new database will make building a Dyson sphere easy" is a slightly... loftier claim than "we can probably land rockets and reuse them".

>just because "reusable rockets" got laughed at by the existing space industry …

Were they laughed at? After all, the Space Shuttle was around for decades. It turned out that reusable rockets were not cost effective nor particularly safe. Space X has yet to show reusability is viable.

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#38
post #28
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true about the soil. Areas in Europe have been farmed for hundreds or more years and still productive.

I believe OP is referring to the impacts of climate change rendering farming unsustainable.

"before the soil is over taxed"

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#39
post #28
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not true about the soil. Areas in Europe have been farmed for hundreds or more years and still productive.

I believe OP is referring to the impacts of climate change rendering farming unsustainable.

I'm thinking he's talking about running out of phosphate [0]. Phosphate is a critical plant nutrient and mining it has been essential in increasing yields in the last century - it's literally sustained the population growth. The known supplies are running low, and it washes out of the soil on an annual basis so needs to be replenished to keep up yields — or we need to find other sustainable sources. The 50 years correlates with other (very) rough estimates of remaining supplies available to use for the current agricultural paradigm.

[0] https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/phosphorus-is-...

Re: Help needed to build the colony on Moon, Mars and the Dyson Sphere

#40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because "reusable rockets" got laughed at by the existing space industry doesn't mean every laughable idea is secretly feasible. "My new database will make building a Dyson sphere easy" is a slightly... loftier claim than "we can probably land rockets and reuse them".

>just because "reusable rockets" got laughed at by the existing space industry … Were they laughed at? After all, the Space Shuttle was around for decades. It turned out that reusable rockets were not cost effective nor particularly safe. Space X has yet to show reusability is viable.

> Space X has yet to show reusability is viable.

This is a bizarre assertion. It's clearly viable; no other American launcher can currently carry crew, they gobbled up 60% of the global commercial launch market by 2017, and they're undercutting everyone on price very successfully.

Post reply on HN