3 ms·

I think you're overreacting, or perhaps going off on a bit of a tangent from what I actually said. I didn't accuse anyone of fraud. I even offered kudos. I'm ju

I think you're overreacting, or perhaps going off on a bit of a tangent from what I actually said. I didn't accuse anyone of fraud. I even offered kudos. I'm just trying to adjust expectations because the history is indeed bad even if nobody did any wrong. Would it have been better if I'd said "sad" or "unfortunate" instead? A medium that really has these kinds of density and survivability traits is indeed a great thing, but "niche" is a bit of an understatement. Adding it to the payload of a multi-million dollar rocket is definitely a publicity stunt, so I think it's entirely fair to point out that it might be good for little else depending on how further development plays out.

kragen 7y ago
If you don't launch it into space, it will be destroyed when the sun engulfs the earth in only six billion years, if not earlier. There's a dismayingly large chance that the only thing surviving from our entire culture in only a few million years will be a mass extinction in the fossil record, a halo of geosynchronous metal debris, and whatever data is encoded in such stable forms as these glass discs. In that context, describing it as "a publicity stunt" seems short-sighted to the point of self-parody, like a small child who thinks that the main distinguishing feature of money is that you can buy candy with it. In a very short time, it is likely that the only things humanity has done that are even detectable are the launching of satellites, a mass extinction, and the launching of such archival media.
- notacoward 7y ago
  I know it's fun to call people short-sighted and compare them to children, but grow up yourself. Sending something in this particular medium was a publicity stunt, and it worked. You think we're talking about it here for any other reason than Elon Musk was (tangentially) involved? Sending some sort of beacon or memorial into space is such a great idea we've done it many times before, with better-tested media. If we wanted to try something newer, a Rosetta Project disk would have been a much more obvious choice. Practicality wasn't the point. Publicity was.
  - kragen 7y ago
    The Rosetta Project disks have a much shorter expected lifespan and weigh more, so they're less practical. Since I've been talking about the Rosetta Project and related initiatives for about 15 years, long before Elon Musk was involved, you're also mistaken to assert that "we're [not] talking about it here for any other reason." I mean, I'll take your word that it's true of you, but it's not true of me. Maybe you've got a mouse in your pocket?
    - notacoward 7y ago
      > shorter expected lifespan Shorter claimed. FTFY. > Maybe you've got a mouse in your pocket? By "we" I meant not just two people but the dozens who have commented here. But you knew that. Let me know when you want to have a discussion instead of merely trolling.
      - dang 7y ago
        Hey, please don't break the site guidelines by crossing into personal attack, no matter how provocative another comment may be or feel. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        notacoward 7y ago
        Nice to see you again, dang. Keep up the good work.
  - Robotbeat 7y ago
    Publicity stunt by whom? The whole point of the Arch Mission is stuff like this: https://www.archmission.org/ https://www.archmission.org/ Using this exact media was a full test of the technology, to get it out of the lab and into the environment they intend for it long-term. But I can see you're committed to this narrative, so please don't let me interrupt it with the actual organization responsible for it.
    - 7y ago
Robotbeat 7y ago
It wasn't a publicity stunt by the University. Preserving knowledge over extreme periods of time is the whole point of the Arch organization (which is not for profit). It's weird, maybe not practical, but it's the whole point. Also, such rockets often just use a mass simulator (i.e. block of concrete or metal) on inaugural flights, so there's nothing wrong with giving it a shot.

kragen 7y ago

If you don't launch it into space, it will be destroyed when the sun engulfs the earth in only six billion years, if not earlier. There's a dismayingly large chance that the only thing surviving from our entire culture in only a few million years will be a mass extinction in the fossil record, a halo of geosynchronous metal debris, and whatever data is encoded in such stable forms as these glass discs. In that context, describing it as "a publicity stunt" seems short-sighted to the point of self-parody, like a small child who thinks that the main distinguishing feature of money is that you can buy candy with it. In a very short time, it is likely that the only things humanity has done that are even detectable are the launching of satellites, a mass extinction, and the launching of such archival media.

notacoward 7y ago
I know it's fun to call people short-sighted and compare them to children, but grow up yourself. Sending something in this particular medium was a publicity stunt, and it worked. You think we're talking about it here for any other reason than Elon Musk was (tangentially) involved? Sending some sort of beacon or memorial into space is such a great idea we've done it many times before, with better-tested media. If we wanted to try something newer, a Rosetta Project disk would have been a much more obvious choice. Practicality wasn't the point. Publicity was.
- kragen 7y ago
  The Rosetta Project disks have a much shorter expected lifespan and weigh more, so they're less practical. Since I've been talking about the Rosetta Project and related initiatives for about 15 years, long before Elon Musk was involved, you're also mistaken to assert that "we're [not] talking about it here for any other reason." I mean, I'll take your word that it's true of you, but it's not true of me. Maybe you've got a mouse in your pocket?
  - notacoward 7y ago
    > shorter expected lifespan Shorter claimed. FTFY. > Maybe you've got a mouse in your pocket? By "we" I meant not just two people but the dozens who have commented here. But you knew that. Let me know when you want to have a discussion instead of merely trolling.
    - dang 7y ago
      Hey, please don't break the site guidelines by crossing into personal attack, no matter how provocative another comment may be or feel. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - notacoward 7y ago
        Nice to see you again, dang. Keep up the good work.
- Robotbeat 7y ago
  Publicity stunt by whom? The whole point of the Arch Mission is stuff like this: https://www.archmission.org/ https://www.archmission.org/ Using this exact media was a full test of the technology, to get it out of the lab and into the environment they intend for it long-term. But I can see you're committed to this narrative, so please don't let me interrupt it with the actual organization responsible for it.
  - 7y ago

Robotbeat 7y ago

It wasn't a publicity stunt by the University. Preserving knowledge over extreme periods of time is the whole point of the Arch organization (which is not for profit). It's weird, maybe not practical, but it's the whole point. Also, such rockets often just use a mass simulator (i.e. block of concrete or metal) on inaugural flights, so there's nothing wrong with giving it a shot.