Generic Business Oriented Website

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers"

nomb wrote:"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers"

it's simply thermodynamics & logistics... a colony on mars or the moon would never NOT be a massive drain on earth resources, and nobody's making it to another star system alive... ever

I'll stick to fictional adventures and so should everyone else (unless they're looking for a costly, ice-cold early grave)

Generation ships, bro.

Necrometer wrote:
and nobody's making it to another star system alive... ever

I'll accept this challenge.

if threads had stock prices..

Necrometer wrote:nobody's making it to another star system alive... ever

i know you're a big time science papa but seriously.

dilithium crystals bro.

What's wrong with the idea of ships that people load up, grow old, have kids (etc., etc), and then die on? Sci fi f'sho, but not impossible.

but that's not even a person travelling between stars, which is what I was saying

being born in the void and then landing on some planet is a-ok

but the idea that this is somehow the MOST ECONOMICAL FIX for a dying planet...

that STUPIED fucking space taxi

rest in pieces you shitpile

humans can't die fast enough

I've probably thought about this entirely too much over the last 2-odd years, but it's really kind of interesting to me how many 20th century sci-fi tropes have now become dated, almost nostalgic. Deep space exploration/colonization is one of them, self-aware AI is the other big one, I would say. Turns out the only one who didn't have it mostly wrong was William Gibson, and I don't think he was even that interested in predicting future technology. Cyberpunk certainly seems like the most prophetic and accurate subgenre of sci-fi these days.

And space colonization as a way to start over because we've clearly fucked up our first attempt is just... ugh. Don't get me started. Laibach already did that joke 20 years ago.

Necrometer wrote:

nomb wrote:"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers"

it's simply thermodynamics & logistics... a colony on mars or the moon would never NOT be a massive drain on earth resources, and nobody's making it to another star system alive... ever

While I agree that it's not very likely that people will ever be able to travel to another star system, to say that there couldn't be massive, self sustaining colonies on the moon or mars in 500 years, or even 100, is short sighted*. Also, your stance that any resources spent on interplanetary colonization or the search for extra terrestrial life forms is a waste is just obtuse. Do you have any idea how much new technology came from just the pointless space race? What kind of a scientist are you, again? You should probably keep your expert opinion in the field in which you're an expert.

Short sighted

bland ed wrote:Short sighted

Ooof. I didn't realize I typed that. Was being ushered out the door by wifey as I was typing. Good call.

also just kim that ross is in here just rossing shit up, no reason to rossed up over it

bland ed wrote:also just kim that

FVBTVS wrote:

bland ed wrote:also just kim that

response pending, J

if humans in space doesn't look like star trek circa 1967 then i really don't see the point in pursuing the issue any further.

richard branson isn't captain james t. kirk....not by a longshot.

Jerrod wrote:While I agree that it's not very likely that people will ever be able to travel to another star system, to say that there couldn't be massive, self sustaining colonies on the moon or mars in 500 years, or even 100, is short sighted.

There certainly could be colonies, but they'd essentially be resorts built on the poverty of those on Earth. Pyramids of the future. There's little to learn on the moon, and there's no benefit to being on Mars. And setting up self-sustaining colonies is nowhere near as trivial as the hucksters would have you believe. There's no resources up there. We are incredibly dependent on our ecosystem, and we've been getting fat thanks to fossil fuels. Mars has no soil, no atmosphere, no fuel.
http://www.space.com/27451-private-mars ... study.html
Don't get me wrong, I'll tune in to watch these brave adventurers perish one-by-one out there when it inevitably happens... but it's going to be a grim and short-lived jaunt.

Jerrod wrote:Also, your stance that any resources spent on interplanetary colonization or the search for extra terrestrial life forms is a waste is just obtuse.

I think it's worth having a serious gaze out into the neighborhood, but I don't think going door-to-door is a very good use of energy. There are no aliens anyway... The Drake equation evaporates once you have an understanding of exactly how unlikely abiogenesis is.

Jerrod wrote:Do you have any idea how much new technology came from just the pointless space race?

I'm all for state-funded research, but I'd rather we just fund the problems we'd like to address instead of a flashy PR stunt. If putting people in space is the only way to fund such research, then I'm not mad that NASA did stuff and continued to do stuff, but it's not going to change my mind about the underlying worth of this type of frontier-pushing.

Jerrod wrote:What kind of a scientist are you, again? You should probably keep your expert opinion in the field in which you're an expert.

I'm a biochemist. Regardless, I think I am qualified to consider the fundamentals of it being insanely expensive and largely pointless to send people to uninhabitable places with no apparent value beyond ego-stroking.

saw a student wearing this shirt this morning
it's fucking disgusting if you think about it at all

enough of this anti-ambition sadsackery. I need some inspiration