6 ms·

Why is trying to colonize Mars not productive? How do you define productivity?

adekok 9y ago
Spending billions to get a small number of people to a place which will likely kill them is not very productive. Cool, yes. Fulfilling dreams, yes. And whatever happened to having people support their position with logical arguments? Your comment is largely You need to prove why it isn't a good idea. No, it doesn't work like that. If you're in favor of society spending billions of dollars on something, it's up to you to demonstrate why that spending is better than the alternatives. Or, if you're a multi-billionare, spend your own money however you see fit, and don't take advice from random people on the net. And a side note... these comments seem to be unpopular. I'm not being mean or putting people down. I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible. But there are minimal counter-arguments which address my points. It's much easier to down-vote comments which you don't like, than to engage someone in order to understand why they disagree with you.
- Nomentatus 9y ago
  "It furthers one to have some place to go." - I Ching (I KNEW we shoulda stayed in Africa. All that travelling to achieve... winter.)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- jamesrcole 9y ago
  > These comments seem to be unpopular. ... I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible. No you're not. I haven't seen you make any attempt explain such things. You currently have four comments under this post, show me any part of any one of them that makes even the slightest attempt to explain such things.
  - adekok 9y ago
    Sure... saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why. But the why isn't that difficult to come up with. I've made more detailed comments on the other Mars story (see my comment history). But whatever my issues, I'm definitely getting downvoted for saying engineering reality is preferable to pipe dreams. And the counter-arguments of "but people have dreamed for years!" or "no, YOU have to prove why it's unfeasible" are inappropriate. Similarly, your attempt to call me out on a pedantic detail, but at the same time ignoring the illogical counter "arguments" really is the new HN. Illogic and group-think are becoming more important than reality-based discussions.
    - jamesrcole 9y ago
      > Sure... saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why. But the why isn't that difficult to come up with. You're dodging the issue. You said there was no reason for people to criticize your comments because "I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible". I pointed out that that claim was completely false. You say "saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why" - actually, it's no explanation as to why it is expensive, or why it is "likely not feasible". Then you say "But the why isn't that difficult to come up with" which has nothing to do with the issue of whether you're claim about what you did in the thread is true or not. > I'm definitely getting downvoted for saying engineering reality is preferable to pipe dreams. Even if you're getting some of those downvotes for that, look at how loaded such a statement is. What, again, is your justification for calling it a "pipe dream"? And anyway, pleanty of things that were once called "pipe dreams" have become reality. Also, it's ridiculous to use "engineering reality" as the benchmark - because unless you believe that there's no progress or evolution in our engineering capabilities, then what is "engineering reality" will not correspond to the reality in 5, 10, 15, 50 or 100 years from now. > Similarly, your attempt to call me out on a pedantic detail You made a substantive false claim that all you were doing was "explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible" and I called you out on it. And it wasn't an "attempt". I called you out and you weren't able to show anything that backs up that claim.
      - 9y ago
- farresito 9y ago
  It's fine to have unpopular opinions. I'm not bashing on it. The way I see it is, at some point in the future we will have to expand. I don't see any reason why we should not try to at least develop part of the technology now. I understand the argument that, right now, the technology is pretty expensive and we might not get too much out of it. But surely we will have to do it at some point in the future. I think it's nice someone is willing to put the time and effort to at least try. As far as I know, neither of us will have to put a dime into the project. I completely respect your opinion, but it's hard to understand why it is so bad for a guy to spend billions in a technology that will be fundamental in the future.

Spending billions to get a small number of people to a place which will likely kill them is not very productive. Cool, yes. Fulfilling dreams, yes. And whatever happened to having people support their position with logical arguments? Your comment is largely You need to prove why it isn't a good idea. No, it doesn't work like that. If you're in favor of society spending billions of dollars on something, it's up to you to demonstrate why that spending is better than the alternatives. Or, if you're a multi-billionare, spend your own money however you see fit, and don't take advice from random people on the net. And a side note... these comments seem to be unpopular. I'm not being mean or putting people down. I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible. But there are minimal counter-arguments which address my points. It's much easier to down-vote comments which you don't like, than to engage someone in order to understand why they disagree with you.

Nomentatus 9y ago
"It furthers one to have some place to go." - I Ching (I KNEW we shoulda stayed in Africa. All that travelling to achieve... winter.)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jamesrcole 9y ago
> These comments seem to be unpopular. ... I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible. No you're not. I haven't seen you make any attempt explain such things. You currently have four comments under this post, show me any part of any one of them that makes even the slightest attempt to explain such things.
- adekok 9y ago
  Sure... saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why. But the why isn't that difficult to come up with. I've made more detailed comments on the other Mars story (see my comment history). But whatever my issues, I'm definitely getting downvoted for saying engineering reality is preferable to pipe dreams. And the counter-arguments of "but people have dreamed for years!" or "no, YOU have to prove why it's unfeasible" are inappropriate. Similarly, your attempt to call me out on a pedantic detail, but at the same time ignoring the illogical counter "arguments" really is the new HN. Illogic and group-think are becoming more important than reality-based discussions.
  - jamesrcole 9y ago
    > Sure... saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why. But the why isn't that difficult to come up with. You're dodging the issue. You said there was no reason for people to criticize your comments because "I'm just explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible". I pointed out that that claim was completely false. You say "saying it is expensive isn't much of an explanation as to why" - actually, it's no explanation as to why it is expensive, or why it is "likely not feasible". Then you say "But the why isn't that difficult to come up with" which has nothing to do with the issue of whether you're claim about what you did in the thread is true or not. > I'm definitely getting downvoted for saying engineering reality is preferable to pipe dreams. Even if you're getting some of those downvotes for that, look at how loaded such a statement is. What, again, is your justification for calling it a "pipe dream"? And anyway, pleanty of things that were once called "pipe dreams" have become reality. Also, it's ridiculous to use "engineering reality" as the benchmark - because unless you believe that there's no progress or evolution in our engineering capabilities, then what is "engineering reality" will not correspond to the reality in 5, 10, 15, 50 or 100 years from now. > Similarly, your attempt to call me out on a pedantic detail You made a substantive false claim that all you were doing was "explaining why Mars is expensive and likely not feaasible" and I called you out on it. And it wasn't an "attempt". I called you out and you weren't able to show anything that backs up that claim.
    - 9y ago
farresito 9y ago
It's fine to have unpopular opinions. I'm not bashing on it. The way I see it is, at some point in the future we will have to expand. I don't see any reason why we should not try to at least develop part of the technology now. I understand the argument that, right now, the technology is pretty expensive and we might not get too much out of it. But surely we will have to do it at some point in the future. I think it's nice someone is willing to put the time and effort to at least try. As far as I know, neither of us will have to put a dime into the project. I completely respect your opinion, but it's hard to understand why it is so bad for a guy to spend billions in a technology that will be fundamental in the future.