6 ms·

"nonsense reasons" You mean..."Science"?

fastball 7y ago
What useful science has been achieved in the last 100 years thanks to astronomy? Meanwhile, what kind of useful science do you think can be facilitated by globally accessible high-speed internet? The value generated by such a network is clearly orders of magnitude more useful than observing the cosmos, at this juncture of human endeavor. Not too mention that Starlink will allow SpaceX to re-invest more and more money into space launches / space travel. I'd much prefer humans actually visit other celestial bodies rather than just staring at them.
- petschge 7y ago
  What useful thing has been produced by the internet? I'd much rather have humans enjoy nature than writing about it on the internet.
  - fastball 7y ago
    Surely you can't be serious.
  - elfexec 7y ago
    > What useful thing has been produced by the internet? Is this Hacker News? This is the type of nonsense I expect on the NYTimes comment section. > I'd much rather have humans enjoy nature than writing about it on the internet. Why are you here instead of enjoying nature?
  - bufferoverflow 7y ago
    The internet produced thousands of wonderful things. Your argument is 100% baseless. Astronomy is nice too, but I will choose the internet every time, if forced to choose. We have wonderful images of the whole sky in all kinds of spectrum in incredible resolution.
  - erikpukinskis 7y ago
    Minority individuals who would normally feel outcast from society have access to a culture of their peers.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- SiempreViernes 7y ago
  We pretty much have globally accessible high speed internet though, and poverty is the main factor blocking significant further access, not mountains.
  - fastball 7y ago
    We absolutely do not have globally accessible high speed internet. Starlink means you can be doing research in the middle of the Amazon and have good internet. Antarctica. Middle of the ocean. Wherever. Sure, population centres are all connected to the internet by now, but that's really not what I'm talking about. Also, a good way to make internet cheaper (so that those in poverty have access) is to provide more alternatives to access / competition.
    - SiempreViernes 7y ago
      None of those noble cases are actually what it's being built for though, the 100 scientists in the Amazonas aren't the reason you put up 1500 satellites in one year. Likewise, those in poverty living far from population centres (by the way, those are the places with most of the people) are better served by being gifted 10 bricks so they can build an actual stove.
      - fastball 7y ago
        What is it being built for, if not globally available (as in, actually anywhere in the globe), high-speed, low latency, low cost internet? It's built for whoever gets utility out of it and will pay for it, those "noble cases" included. It's not for them, but it enables them. The internet can tell you how to build a better stove, farm better, raise animals better, discourage you from barbaric rituals that don't actually have the effect you believe them to have, etc. Arguably the poorest, most ignorant of the world are the same people that need the knowledge the internet can provide the most.
        bdamm 7y ago
        I agree with all but the last sentence. The Internet is not always correlated with a happier life and the Internet isn’t sure to educate the ignorant.
- xkjkls 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background
  - fastball 7y ago
    What is knowing about the CMBR useful for?
    - xkjkls 7y ago
      Umm? Knowing about the Big Bang?
      - fastball 7y ago
        The discovery of the CMBR did not lead to the theory of the Big Bang. But astronomy in general certainly did, for sure. That doesn't really answer my question though, but that's probably my fault for using a word as subjective as "useful", so let me rephrase: How has astronomical knowledge of the CMBR/Big Bang/Black Holes/Pulsars/Galaxies/etc. fundamentally improved the human condition? What specifically have we been able to do (not "know") that we would not have been able to do without terrestrial astronomy?
- BinaryAsteroid 7y ago
  The internet was created in a particle-physics laboratory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web In the last 100 years, advances in particle physics have been aided by our study of high-energy mechanisms in the universe (nuclear fusion in star systems, supernovae, acceleration of the expansion of the universe, etc.).. so you have internet thanks, in part, to astronomy.. what a silly comment..
  - fastball 7y ago
    We did not discover nuclear fusion from the stars, we realized the possibility of nuclear fusion and subsequently realized that this is what must power the sun (and every other star). Ditto for everything else on that list. We made discoveries by looking at things and performing experiments here on earth and then realized that these things must be what is causing X and Y out in the cosmos.
    - bdamm 7y ago
      The discovery and confirmation of relativistic physics has resulted in more efficient materials research and led to space technology (communications) and microprocessor improvements here on earth.
    - BinaryAsteroid 7y ago
      Again you make wild false claims.. The first major breakthroughs for understanding nuclear fusion came because we wanted to understand what powered the Sun and Stars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_nuclear_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_nuclear_fusion .. and these events began 100 years ago. Part of what you say is true, we make discoveries by looking at things.. Astronomy gives us more things to look at, and in energy regimes that cost many $$ to replicate in experiments on Earth..
      - fastball 7y ago
        Your claim is not substantiated by the source, while mine actually is. Without Einstein's E = mc^2, Arthur Eddington would not have realized that the fusing of nuclei could power the sun. In other words, he realized that fusing two atoms would release a lot of energy thanks to terrestrial research, and then hypothesized that this is what must power the sun. He did not come to this theory from staring at the sun through a telescope. Astronomy clearly did not lead to fusion - atomic theory did, which did not come from astronomy. And neither did Einstein formulate E = mc^2 because he was an avid astronomer who wanted to understand the sun. I am well aware this happened more than 100 years ago, not sure why you would be under the impression that I thought otherwise or needed to hear that for some reason.
cdash 7y ago
Any "Science" being done can correctly account for it.

What useful science has been achieved in the last 100 years thanks to astronomy? Meanwhile, what kind of useful science do you think can be facilitated by globally accessible high-speed internet? The value generated by such a network is clearly orders of magnitude more useful than observing the cosmos, at this juncture of human endeavor. Not too mention that Starlink will allow SpaceX to re-invest more and more money into space launches / space travel. I'd much prefer humans actually visit other celestial bodies rather than just staring at them.

petschge 7y ago
What useful thing has been produced by the internet? I'd much rather have humans enjoy nature than writing about it on the internet.
- fastball 7y ago
  Surely you can't be serious.
- elfexec 7y ago
  > What useful thing has been produced by the internet? Is this Hacker News? This is the type of nonsense I expect on the NYTimes comment section. > I'd much rather have humans enjoy nature than writing about it on the internet. Why are you here instead of enjoying nature?
- bufferoverflow 7y ago
  The internet produced thousands of wonderful things. Your argument is 100% baseless. Astronomy is nice too, but I will choose the internet every time, if forced to choose. We have wonderful images of the whole sky in all kinds of spectrum in incredible resolution.
- erikpukinskis 7y ago
  Minority individuals who would normally feel outcast from society have access to a culture of their peers.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
SiempreViernes 7y ago
We pretty much have globally accessible high speed internet though, and poverty is the main factor blocking significant further access, not mountains.
- fastball 7y ago
  We absolutely do not have globally accessible high speed internet. Starlink means you can be doing research in the middle of the Amazon and have good internet. Antarctica. Middle of the ocean. Wherever. Sure, population centres are all connected to the internet by now, but that's really not what I'm talking about. Also, a good way to make internet cheaper (so that those in poverty have access) is to provide more alternatives to access / competition.
  - SiempreViernes 7y ago
    None of those noble cases are actually what it's being built for though, the 100 scientists in the Amazonas aren't the reason you put up 1500 satellites in one year. Likewise, those in poverty living far from population centres (by the way, those are the places with most of the people) are better served by being gifted 10 bricks so they can build an actual stove.
    - fastball 7y ago
      What is it being built for, if not globally available (as in, actually anywhere in the globe), high-speed, low latency, low cost internet? It's built for whoever gets utility out of it and will pay for it, those "noble cases" included. It's not for them, but it enables them. The internet can tell you how to build a better stove, farm better, raise animals better, discourage you from barbaric rituals that don't actually have the effect you believe them to have, etc. Arguably the poorest, most ignorant of the world are the same people that need the knowledge the internet can provide the most.
      - bdamm 7y ago
        I agree with all but the last sentence. The Internet is not always correlated with a happier life and the Internet isn’t sure to educate the ignorant.
xkjkls 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background
- fastball 7y ago
  What is knowing about the CMBR useful for?
  - xkjkls 7y ago
    Umm? Knowing about the Big Bang?
    - fastball 7y ago
      The discovery of the CMBR did not lead to the theory of the Big Bang. But astronomy in general certainly did, for sure. That doesn't really answer my question though, but that's probably my fault for using a word as subjective as "useful", so let me rephrase: How has astronomical knowledge of the CMBR/Big Bang/Black Holes/Pulsars/Galaxies/etc. fundamentally improved the human condition? What specifically have we been able to do (not "know") that we would not have been able to do without terrestrial astronomy?
BinaryAsteroid 7y ago
The internet was created in a particle-physics laboratory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web In the last 100 years, advances in particle physics have been aided by our study of high-energy mechanisms in the universe (nuclear fusion in star systems, supernovae, acceleration of the expansion of the universe, etc.).. so you have internet thanks, in part, to astronomy.. what a silly comment..
- fastball 7y ago
  We did not discover nuclear fusion from the stars, we realized the possibility of nuclear fusion and subsequently realized that this is what must power the sun (and every other star). Ditto for everything else on that list. We made discoveries by looking at things and performing experiments here on earth and then realized that these things must be what is causing X and Y out in the cosmos.
  - bdamm 7y ago
    The discovery and confirmation of relativistic physics has resulted in more efficient materials research and led to space technology (communications) and microprocessor improvements here on earth.
  - BinaryAsteroid 7y ago
    Again you make wild false claims.. The first major breakthroughs for understanding nuclear fusion came because we wanted to understand what powered the Sun and Stars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_nuclear_fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_nuclear_fusion .. and these events began 100 years ago. Part of what you say is true, we make discoveries by looking at things.. Astronomy gives us more things to look at, and in energy regimes that cost many $$ to replicate in experiments on Earth..
    - fastball 7y ago
      Your claim is not substantiated by the source, while mine actually is. Without Einstein's E = mc^2, Arthur Eddington would not have realized that the fusing of nuclei could power the sun. In other words, he realized that fusing two atoms would release a lot of energy thanks to terrestrial research, and then hypothesized that this is what must power the sun. He did not come to this theory from staring at the sun through a telescope. Astronomy clearly did not lead to fusion - atomic theory did, which did not come from astronomy. And neither did Einstein formulate E = mc^2 because he was an avid astronomer who wanted to understand the sun. I am well aware this happened more than 100 years ago, not sure why you would be under the impression that I thought otherwise or needed to hear that for some reason.

cdash 7y ago

Any "Science" being done can correctly account for it.