4 ms·
What was that limit on data transmission via copper again? 300baud? Or was it 1400? Nice the way science always ends for idiots like this...
by hsmyers 15y ago
What was that limit on data transmission via copper again? 300baud? Or was it 1400? Nice the way science always ends for idiots like this...
- ubercore 15y agoWhile I think I may agree with your sentiment (though maybe not your tone), I think it's kind of humorous to compare interstellar exploration and colonization with modem speeds. Edit: Curious about downvotes?
- scott_s 15y agoThe limits he talks about are fundamental. We would have to be very wrong about much of physics to invalidate his arguments.
- waterlesscloud 15y agoIt is virtually certain that we are very wrong about much of physics. Perhaps not in ways that solve these issues. But we're still almost certainly wrong about things we consider very fundamental.
- sharpneli 15y agoAt the same time we are very certain on some issues. As an example there will not be a theory which says "You can lift yourself up" and suddenly people grabbing their own belts could lift themselves up into the air. Any future theory will predict exactly the same things as current theories on the cases where current theories have been experimentally verified.
- scott_s 15y agoWhatever we find out has to reduce to what we know now in the conditions we've already looked at. That contrains what we will discover in the future.
- jodrellblank 15y agoYeah, Charles Stross is such an unimaginative backwards thinking Luddite. Come on, wake up a bit. It's a reasoned essay, explaining his assumptions and exclusions, not just some babbling end-of-scientific-progress scaremongering.