3 ms·

I also agree that space pirates are not a next-hundred-years problem...but disagree that with existing propulsion technology (or incremental, ordinary improveme

I also agree that space pirates are not a next-hundred-years problem...but disagree that with existing propulsion technology (or incremental, ordinary improvements on it in the next hundred years) we cannot become multi-planetary in the next hundred years. Space piracy implies a rogue individual or group grabbing stuff in space and selling it on the black market for profit. I completely agree that's next to impossible. 17th-century piracy on the high seas relied on widely shared seafaring expertise, many potential customers and victims, and an ease of entry that's just not present in space. But we've had people in space on the ISS continuously for more than a decade now, we landed on the moon half a century ago, and it's all getting constantly cheaper and easier. I would be shocked and disappointed (moreso than I already am in our abandonment of the moon) if we didn't have a Mars base in a century.

tardo99 9y ago
I can't imagine a Mars base being useful in any meaningful way (aside from _maybe_ some sort of esoteric scientific utility) without reducing the transit time between the planets to at most a few days.
- megaman22 9y ago
  If a compelling economic reason arises, travel times under current technology aren't unreasonable. In the age of sail, whalers and merchants routinely went on even multiyear voyages. There are other life-support challenges to surmount, but then again, we'll probably end up with robotic spacecraft anyway doing long haul routes, and that becomes more moot.
the8472 9y ago
17th century piracy with people boarding spaceships or capturing satellites? Probably not. But how about hacking of satellites built with insecure off the shelf components? The IoT. In space. This gets even more interesting once someone builds an insecure satellite tug. The first group to hack one can threaten other satellites within the tug's reach.
ethbro 9y ago
We've got plenty of people willing to risk their lives for a chance at riches. We've got technology that's making it borderline cost effective to survive in space. ... we're only missing in-space mining and manufacturing (at least of the basics). The cost of launching all of the above from the Earth's surface is what's killing the economics. And ironically, there's a fairly accurate parallel to the resource- and legal- 16th century Caribbean.

tardo99 9y ago

I can't imagine a Mars base being useful in any meaningful way (aside from _maybe_ some sort of esoteric scientific utility) without reducing the transit time between the planets to at most a few days.

megaman22 9y ago
If a compelling economic reason arises, travel times under current technology aren't unreasonable. In the age of sail, whalers and merchants routinely went on even multiyear voyages. There are other life-support challenges to surmount, but then again, we'll probably end up with robotic spacecraft anyway doing long haul routes, and that becomes more moot.

the8472 9y ago

17th century piracy with people boarding spaceships or capturing satellites? Probably not. But how about hacking of satellites built with insecure off the shelf components? The IoT. In space. This gets even more interesting once someone builds an insecure satellite tug. The first group to hack one can threaten other satellites within the tug's reach.

ethbro 9y ago

We've got plenty of people willing to risk their lives for a chance at riches. We've got technology that's making it borderline cost effective to survive in space. ... we're only missing in-space mining and manufacturing (at least of the basics). The cost of launching all of the above from the Earth's surface is what's killing the economics. And ironically, there's a fairly accurate parallel to the resource- and legal- 16th century Caribbean.