6 ms·

Long term continuity of the human race, by backing up to another physical medium, I.e. planet

JoshTriplett 10y ago
As well as a massive motivating research goal with incredibly hard problems that tend to have practical applications on Earth. And a means of inspiring billions.
- viach 10y ago
  Latest news show (imho) that Earth's ecosystem tend to be ruined in current century. We'll just fly to Mars then, right?
erikpukinskis 10y ago
Anyone looking to invest in the long term continuity of the human race would be foolish to invest in space travel. There are practically limitless terrestrial investments which would offer much better ROI. I have yet to see anyone describe a single scenario of even low probability where Mars is more habitable than the entirety of Earth.
- viach 10y ago
  Can't agree more. Again, what's in "continuity of human race" for ordinary people, like me and the most over here?
- tokipin 10y ago
  The idea is to have our eggs in more than one basket so that the next mass extinction event doesn't take us all out or set us back hundreds of years. Whether life on mars is fun or not is a separate question. (I do agree with you. We can barely manage to live in Antarctica. Mars will be much more difficult.) And in becoming multiplanetary, we can start gaining the tools that could help us avoid some of those extinction events.
  - erikpukinskis 10y ago
    I get the idea. I'm saying we're better served by improving our Earth baskets than trying to add a Mars one. Moving 1% of your net worth out of your home currency doesn't make any sense if 99% of your money is invested in a Ponzi scheme. You want to move some of it to a safer investment before worrying about outlandish economic collapse scenarios. Not all diversification is created equal. Not sure what you mean by extinction avoiding tools or why you think developing them on Mars will be easier than on Earth.
    - Rhapso 10y ago
      Different fundamental goal. Putting 1% in another market is an amazing way to increase the odds somebody survives. In terms of optimizing for "maximum likelihood of humanity's future existence" local improvement are marginal, versus colonization which essentially ORs the odds of survival together. The ideal is to have as many people as possible living sustainably in poverty in the asteroid belt as soon as possible.

As well as a massive motivating research goal with incredibly hard problems that tend to have practical applications on Earth. And a means of inspiring billions.

viach 10y ago
Latest news show (imho) that Earth's ecosystem tend to be ruined in current century. We'll just fly to Mars then, right?

erikpukinskis 10y ago

Anyone looking to invest in the long term continuity of the human race would be foolish to invest in space travel. There are practically limitless terrestrial investments which would offer much better ROI. I have yet to see anyone describe a single scenario of even low probability where Mars is more habitable than the entirety of Earth.

viach 10y ago
Can't agree more. Again, what's in "continuity of human race" for ordinary people, like me and the most over here?
tokipin 10y ago
The idea is to have our eggs in more than one basket so that the next mass extinction event doesn't take us all out or set us back hundreds of years. Whether life on mars is fun or not is a separate question. (I do agree with you. We can barely manage to live in Antarctica. Mars will be much more difficult.) And in becoming multiplanetary, we can start gaining the tools that could help us avoid some of those extinction events.
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  I get the idea. I'm saying we're better served by improving our Earth baskets than trying to add a Mars one. Moving 1% of your net worth out of your home currency doesn't make any sense if 99% of your money is invested in a Ponzi scheme. You want to move some of it to a safer investment before worrying about outlandish economic collapse scenarios. Not all diversification is created equal. Not sure what you mean by extinction avoiding tools or why you think developing them on Mars will be easier than on Earth.
  - Rhapso 10y ago
    Different fundamental goal. Putting 1% in another market is an amazing way to increase the odds somebody survives. In terms of optimizing for "maximum likelihood of humanity's future existence" local improvement are marginal, versus colonization which essentially ORs the odds of survival together. The ideal is to have as many people as possible living sustainably in poverty in the asteroid belt as soon as possible.