4 ms·

Maybe I've just played too much Civ, but I don't understand why space colonization isn't our top priority. It changes everything. It won't matter if a large p

by dcw303 10y ago

Maybe I've just played too much Civ, but I don't understand why space colonization isn't our top priority. It changes everything. It won't matter if a large percentage of jobs have been automated. The ones that haven't will go up in demand with every habitable planet that is settled.

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
One major hurdle is that getting to anywhere habitable other than the surface of the Earth is way beyond our technological ability.
- aoeu345 10y ago
  It would be an overstatement to say that it's way beyond our technological ability to get to Mars. That's just a long trip in a rocket away. Making it habitable is also within our ability - Live in the lava tubes, or radiation-protected inflatable shelters. To live on another planet is to take a collection of solved problems and engineer the solutions into existence.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
    Good point. It does seem within our engineering ability to live inside a habitat on Mars, true. When I wrote that comment I guess I was probably thinking habitable in a similar way to Earth. Possible to thrive on the surface under ambient conditions.
nradov 10y ago
No matter how much we invest in space colonization, only a minuscule fraction of humans will ever be able to leave earth within the next ~100 years. The cost is simply too high, and technologies like reusable rockets will only bring that down marginally. Only a technology breakthrough in propulsion or materials science will change this equation, and making those areas a higher priority won't necessarily accelerate progress much.
- YCode 10y ago
  Sort of reminds me of the Drell[1] from Mass Effect. They nearly went extinct because their population outgrew their planet, and probably would have if they didn't make contact with the Hanar, a species that had achieved interstellar flight who took a few hundred thousand home with them before the rest died off. [1] http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Drell http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Drell
imaginenore 10y ago
Space colonizers will likely get the most automation. We don't want them to waste time digging dirt with shovels.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
aaron695 10y ago
If you shipped 75 million unemployed people off the planet each year you would only keep up with current population growth, this number is increasing. So, thats getting them to orbit and moving them somewhere. Plus I'm not sure why whereever they end up won't also be automated given you can ship 10's of millions of unemployed people cheap, one assumes robots would also be cheap to ship.
- visarga 10y ago
  You ship a robot factory and it builds robots in the Belt for you.
SFJulie 10y ago
Because the resources for colonizing space with .01% of the population will be synonym of the death of the reminder. Resources are bound. And it will not be viable to send resources from space. Space colonization is just an excuse for subsidizing the military industry nowadays.
politician 10y ago
Search for Isaac Arthur's video on "The impact of nuclear fusion", then the video on Arcologies/vertical farms. You'll learn everything you could possibly want to know about why we aren't going to space en masse right now, and how fusion changes the economics of basically everything. Of course, you might disappear down the awesome rabbit hole that is his Youtube channel.

by dcw303 10y ago

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

One major hurdle is that getting to anywhere habitable other than the surface of the Earth is way beyond our technological ability.

aoeu345 10y ago
It would be an overstatement to say that it's way beyond our technological ability to get to Mars. That's just a long trip in a rocket away. Making it habitable is also within our ability - Live in the lava tubes, or radiation-protected inflatable shelters. To live on another planet is to take a collection of solved problems and engineer the solutions into existence.
- TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
  Good point. It does seem within our engineering ability to live inside a habitat on Mars, true. When I wrote that comment I guess I was probably thinking habitable in a similar way to Earth. Possible to thrive on the surface under ambient conditions.

nradov 10y ago

No matter how much we invest in space colonization, only a minuscule fraction of humans will ever be able to leave earth within the next ~100 years. The cost is simply too high, and technologies like reusable rockets will only bring that down marginally. Only a technology breakthrough in propulsion or materials science will change this equation, and making those areas a higher priority won't necessarily accelerate progress much.

YCode 10y ago
Sort of reminds me of the Drell[1] from Mass Effect. They nearly went extinct because their population outgrew their planet, and probably would have if they didn't make contact with the Hanar, a species that had achieved interstellar flight who took a few hundred thousand home with them before the rest died off. [1] http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Drell http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Drell

imaginenore 10y ago

Space colonizers will likely get the most automation. We don't want them to waste time digging dirt with shovels.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

aaron695 10y ago

If you shipped 75 million unemployed people off the planet each year you would only keep up with current population growth, this number is increasing. So, thats getting them to orbit and moving them somewhere. Plus I'm not sure why whereever they end up won't also be automated given you can ship 10's of millions of unemployed people cheap, one assumes robots would also be cheap to ship.

visarga 10y ago
You ship a robot factory and it builds robots in the Belt for you.

SFJulie 10y ago

Because the resources for colonizing space with .01% of the population will be synonym of the death of the reminder. Resources are bound. And it will not be viable to send resources from space. Space colonization is just an excuse for subsidizing the military industry nowadays.

politician 10y ago

Search for Isaac Arthur's video on "The impact of nuclear fusion", then the video on Arcologies/vertical farms. You'll learn everything you could possibly want to know about why we aren't going to space en masse right now, and how fusion changes the economics of basically everything. Of course, you might disappear down the awesome rabbit hole that is his Youtube channel.