6 ms·

Asteroid mining, if it ever happens, won't be done by poor exploited people toiling under the sun with pickaxes. It will be very expensive, and most likely full

by f00zz 5y ago

Asteroid mining, if it ever happens, won't be done by poor exploited people toiling under the sun with pickaxes. It will be very expensive, and most likely fully automated. Even today Rio Tinto operations are becoming increasingly more automated. And a civilization that can mine asteroids should be unimaginably rich by our standards. Sure, there were horrible industrial disasters like Bhopal, but in the book the aforementioned megacorp kills millions seemingly out of sheer evil. It felt too videogamey for my taste.

dstick 5y ago
Sheer evil? It wasn’t personal or aimed at one specific group of people. It’s just the cost of doing business. Like other siblings said: that’s happening today all over the world. From Amazon warehouse workers to miners.
reader_mode 5y ago
Sci-fi is full of thinly veiled social commentary. The sci-fi aspect distracts you from the fact that messages and themes are shallow and don't really stand on their own. I loved Star Trek as a kid, it inspired my imagination and I didn't really pick up on the social messages, watching it now it's sort of comical or just boring. But I do get a nostalgic feeling from it and it's entertaining enough to be second screen distraction material when doing boring tasks.
- inopinatus 5y ago
  It is not thinly veiled: sci-fi is social commentary. Even Greg Egan dialling up the quantum mechanics is ultimately doing so to explore the societal consequences. As you point out, only children think it is actually about the damn robots and spaceships.
  - reader_mode 5y ago
    Yeah but the need to place it in sci-fi setting feels like adding fluff to mask the fact that the commentary is weak/trivial/boring or detached from reality/wrong. I wish they made more sci-fi about robots and spaceships, I find that stuff entertaining and inspiring. If I want social commentary I have better sources than sci-fi writers. And there is Sci-Fi that's not social commentary.
    - bullfightonmars 5y ago
      > I loved Star Trek as a kid > And there is Sci-Fi that's not social commentary. I'm not sure that this is true. I think you might be confusing the Action and Adventure genres with Sci-Fi. Star Trek, for example, is almost 100% social commentary.
      - reader_mode 5y ago
        The Martian is the first thing that comes to mind as good Sci-Fi with very little social commentary, there is some politics/drama but it's mostly about the Sci-Fi.
        inopinatus 5y ago
        I have to point out that The Martian is not science fiction, because the science in the book is, intentionally, not fictional. Merely having science in your narrative doesn’t make something science fiction, otherwise Greg House would qualify. If I remember right, the only liberty taken w.r.t known understanding in The Martian is with regard to the damage potential of Mars atmospherics. It is certainly educational though, and to me, The Martian is rather in the category of “competence porn”
  - goatlover 5y ago
    Data and Voyager's holographic doctor being central characters where their personhood is called into question sort of makes it about robots. There's a lot of science fiction scenarios with the holodeck, transporter, and various space anomalies for it to only be social commentary. Sometimes Star Trek does very much deal with science fiction scenarios.
sveme 5y ago
It isn't sheer evil in the novels, the corp wants to assess what's happening to people on a large scale if they become infected by the protomolecule. It's a study in a contained space. Not unlikely, I'd say.
- p_l 5y ago
  Not that much different from unwilling participants in USA biological experiments in 20th century, like giving radioactive injections to pregnant mothers to observe damage to foetus...
- goatlover 5y ago
  The corporate scientists have also figured out that the protomolecule needs biomass. And the head scientist has transhumanist aspirations, with a justification that humanity needs to evolve quickly to deal with the god-like aliens that sent it. Not that it's a good justification, but in the first book, it's actually presented as a big temptation, even for some of the good characters.
bserge 5y ago
The minimum wage in some countries is 10+ times higher than in others, yet the poorest citizens still spend everything on rented rooms (not even flats), food and transportation, no savings. From what I've seen, cost of living will increase to the maximum level the poorest can afford it (which is why I don't see how UBI can work without massive changes in other areas).
lenkite 5y ago
If a third-world worker is cheaper than a fully automated system, then you can bet corporations will use them. The craft delivering the miners to the asteroid might be automated though. The back-to-base craft will be made operational only after video verification that the quota has been met.
- emteycz 5y ago
  Yeah... but how would it be cheaper? Caring for humans is hard. Human societies are complex. All of that is a huge risk.
  - lenkite 5y ago
    Easy - the caring part is outsourced to a [Contract Agency] registered in a nation with lax human rights regulations. If mental and long-term health is not a concern, minimal-subsistence living conditions can be made for pennies. If someone snaps or drops-out, they can be replaced from thousands of others on the long application list.
    - emteycz 5y ago
      We're talking about space here. Minimal living conditions absolutely can't be made for pennies, and introduce enormous risks of destruction even without any human inside. And the energy requirements...
      - hef19898 5y ago
        Fusion reactors and a bubble holding something just shy of one bar pressurized breathable air. Cheap enough when we talk about industrial scale asteroid mining. You just have to care a lot less about the people in these bubbles in space than we do now.
        emteycz 5y ago
        I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm saying any competing company not doing that will soon push these off the market.
sbarre 5y ago
Is it hard to believe that an expansion to the rest of the solar system will be anything other than yet another gold rush, in the same way it has been for every "new frontier"? And I don't just mean literal gold or mining.. The Internet in the late 90s and early 2000s, cryptocurrency today, etc... there will always be early adopters and entrepreneurial risk-takers (of varying levels of competency) who precede, and sometimes outlast, the corporations where there's money to be made.. In the Expanse lore, this happened because of the Epstein drive, a relatively cheap type of fusion drive that allowed humanity to go further faster, even in small scrappy ships. So it would make sense that early pioneers would rush out to the belt and beyond to stake their claims.. Look at mining in the third world today. Not so automated, right? Why would it be any different out in the belt? Hundreds of years and millions of people trying to eke out a living, particularly when you also consider the state of planet Earth in the Expanse (essentially a giant welfare state).. that creates an third-world equivalent out there, and I think it's pretty plausible.. Anyways, I respect your take on things regardless.. this is just mine.. the story gets so much better beyond book 1, if you're ever thinking about reconsidering. :-)
- f00zz 5y ago
  Hey, thanks for the comment. I totally respect the authors for writing hard sci-fi space opera. It's just that... the bleak hopeless future theme is getting a bit long in the tooth, you know? If I want to feel depressed I can just turn on the daily news. Incidentally, can anyone recommend some hopeful science fiction? "Schismatrix" is probably my favorite.
  - girvo 5y ago
    Ian M Banks’ “Culture” series can be kind of hopeful in a way, in that the entire existence of the Culture itself is a neat space utopia. The stories themselves aren’t always hopeful in the small, though, but it’s that contrast that makes it so good!
    - f00zz 5y ago
      Thanks! I've been meaning to read those for a while. I'll start with "Consider Phlebas".
pnutjam 5y ago
Not sheer evil. They don't see people, just assets. If you have poor performing assets, you get rid of them. If you find a use for assets that is potentially more productive, why wouldn't you use them that way even if it destroys the asset in the process. It's all about profit/loss. Read more history and you'll see this is pretty much SOP for humans.
usrusr 5y ago
The thing is, they don't mine asteroids with pickaxes. They aren't up there brecause mining requires it, they are mining because existing up there requires the trade from mining and they aren't allowed to exists anywhere else. Perhaps the numbers are a little exaggerated, but you don't need many to make a space habitat appear hopelessly crowded. Take the inhabitants of Wyoming, coop them up on the existing fleet of cruise ships and see how crowded it will get. (a quick glance at Wikipedia numbers suggests that they will fit, but it won't be nice)
jrochkind1 5y ago
Not sheer evil, profit, right? That seems about right. My favorite line from Sorry To Bother You. > So, you making half-human half-horse fucking things so you can make more money? > Yeah, basically. I just didn't want you to think I was crazy. That I was doing this for no reason. Because this isn't irrational.
twobitshifter 5y ago
I think a civilization can be unimaginably rich and still have imaginably poor people toiling away at lower levels. With a laissez-faire system, the economic factors would decide whether machine or man labor is the most cost effective resource. When the mechanized means of production become more intelligent, faster, and accurate, what can the man or woman without any machines of their own do for money? They could work for less than the machines in dangerous conditions, doing the type of work that machines are too valuable for. The optimist can also imagine a utopia where the need to labor vanishes and we collectively benefit from advances in science and technology, but that’s not a given.
- hef19898 5y ago
  Our history, and a lot of countries right now, proof you right.

by f00zz 5y ago

dstick 5y ago

Sheer evil? It wasn’t personal or aimed at one specific group of people. It’s just the cost of doing business. Like other siblings said: that’s happening today all over the world. From Amazon warehouse workers to miners.

reader_mode 5y ago

Sci-fi is full of thinly veiled social commentary. The sci-fi aspect distracts you from the fact that messages and themes are shallow and don't really stand on their own. I loved Star Trek as a kid, it inspired my imagination and I didn't really pick up on the social messages, watching it now it's sort of comical or just boring. But I do get a nostalgic feeling from it and it's entertaining enough to be second screen distraction material when doing boring tasks.

inopinatus 5y ago
It is not thinly veiled: sci-fi is social commentary. Even Greg Egan dialling up the quantum mechanics is ultimately doing so to explore the societal consequences. As you point out, only children think it is actually about the damn robots and spaceships.
- reader_mode 5y ago
  Yeah but the need to place it in sci-fi setting feels like adding fluff to mask the fact that the commentary is weak/trivial/boring or detached from reality/wrong. I wish they made more sci-fi about robots and spaceships, I find that stuff entertaining and inspiring. If I want social commentary I have better sources than sci-fi writers. And there is Sci-Fi that's not social commentary.
  - bullfightonmars 5y ago
    > I loved Star Trek as a kid > And there is Sci-Fi that's not social commentary. I'm not sure that this is true. I think you might be confusing the Action and Adventure genres with Sci-Fi. Star Trek, for example, is almost 100% social commentary.
    - reader_mode 5y ago
      The Martian is the first thing that comes to mind as good Sci-Fi with very little social commentary, there is some politics/drama but it's mostly about the Sci-Fi.
      - inopinatus 5y ago
        I have to point out that The Martian is not science fiction, because the science in the book is, intentionally, not fictional. Merely having science in your narrative doesn’t make something science fiction, otherwise Greg House would qualify. If I remember right, the only liberty taken w.r.t known understanding in The Martian is with regard to the damage potential of Mars atmospherics. It is certainly educational though, and to me, The Martian is rather in the category of “competence porn”
- goatlover 5y ago
  Data and Voyager's holographic doctor being central characters where their personhood is called into question sort of makes it about robots. There's a lot of science fiction scenarios with the holodeck, transporter, and various space anomalies for it to only be social commentary. Sometimes Star Trek does very much deal with science fiction scenarios.

sveme 5y ago

It isn't sheer evil in the novels, the corp wants to assess what's happening to people on a large scale if they become infected by the protomolecule. It's a study in a contained space. Not unlikely, I'd say.

p_l 5y ago
Not that much different from unwilling participants in USA biological experiments in 20th century, like giving radioactive injections to pregnant mothers to observe damage to foetus...
goatlover 5y ago
The corporate scientists have also figured out that the protomolecule needs biomass. And the head scientist has transhumanist aspirations, with a justification that humanity needs to evolve quickly to deal with the god-like aliens that sent it. Not that it's a good justification, but in the first book, it's actually presented as a big temptation, even for some of the good characters.

bserge 5y ago

The minimum wage in some countries is 10+ times higher than in others, yet the poorest citizens still spend everything on rented rooms (not even flats), food and transportation, no savings. From what I've seen, cost of living will increase to the maximum level the poorest can afford it (which is why I don't see how UBI can work without massive changes in other areas).

lenkite 5y ago

If a third-world worker is cheaper than a fully automated system, then you can bet corporations will use them. The craft delivering the miners to the asteroid might be automated though. The back-to-base craft will be made operational only after video verification that the quota has been met.

emteycz 5y ago
Yeah... but how would it be cheaper? Caring for humans is hard. Human societies are complex. All of that is a huge risk.
- lenkite 5y ago
  Easy - the caring part is outsourced to a [Contract Agency] registered in a nation with lax human rights regulations. If mental and long-term health is not a concern, minimal-subsistence living conditions can be made for pennies. If someone snaps or drops-out, they can be replaced from thousands of others on the long application list.
  - emteycz 5y ago
    We're talking about space here. Minimal living conditions absolutely can't be made for pennies, and introduce enormous risks of destruction even without any human inside. And the energy requirements...
    - hef19898 5y ago
      Fusion reactors and a bubble holding something just shy of one bar pressurized breathable air. Cheap enough when we talk about industrial scale asteroid mining. You just have to care a lot less about the people in these bubbles in space than we do now.
      - emteycz 5y ago
        I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm saying any competing company not doing that will soon push these off the market.

sbarre 5y ago

Is it hard to believe that an expansion to the rest of the solar system will be anything other than yet another gold rush, in the same way it has been for every "new frontier"? And I don't just mean literal gold or mining.. The Internet in the late 90s and early 2000s, cryptocurrency today, etc... there will always be early adopters and entrepreneurial risk-takers (of varying levels of competency) who precede, and sometimes outlast, the corporations where there's money to be made.. In the Expanse lore, this happened because of the Epstein drive, a relatively cheap type of fusion drive that allowed humanity to go further faster, even in small scrappy ships. So it would make sense that early pioneers would rush out to the belt and beyond to stake their claims.. Look at mining in the third world today. Not so automated, right? Why would it be any different out in the belt? Hundreds of years and millions of people trying to eke out a living, particularly when you also consider the state of planet Earth in the Expanse (essentially a giant welfare state).. that creates an third-world equivalent out there, and I think it's pretty plausible.. Anyways, I respect your take on things regardless.. this is just mine.. the story gets so much better beyond book 1, if you're ever thinking about reconsidering. :-)

f00zz 5y ago
Hey, thanks for the comment. I totally respect the authors for writing hard sci-fi space opera. It's just that... the bleak hopeless future theme is getting a bit long in the tooth, you know? If I want to feel depressed I can just turn on the daily news. Incidentally, can anyone recommend some hopeful science fiction? "Schismatrix" is probably my favorite.
- girvo 5y ago
  Ian M Banks’ “Culture” series can be kind of hopeful in a way, in that the entire existence of the Culture itself is a neat space utopia. The stories themselves aren’t always hopeful in the small, though, but it’s that contrast that makes it so good!
  - f00zz 5y ago
    Thanks! I've been meaning to read those for a while. I'll start with "Consider Phlebas".

pnutjam 5y ago

Not sheer evil. They don't see people, just assets. If you have poor performing assets, you get rid of them. If you find a use for assets that is potentially more productive, why wouldn't you use them that way even if it destroys the asset in the process. It's all about profit/loss. Read more history and you'll see this is pretty much SOP for humans.

usrusr 5y ago

The thing is, they don't mine asteroids with pickaxes. They aren't up there brecause mining requires it, they are mining because existing up there requires the trade from mining and they aren't allowed to exists anywhere else. Perhaps the numbers are a little exaggerated, but you don't need many to make a space habitat appear hopelessly crowded. Take the inhabitants of Wyoming, coop them up on the existing fleet of cruise ships and see how crowded it will get. (a quick glance at Wikipedia numbers suggests that they will fit, but it won't be nice)

jrochkind1 5y ago

Not sheer evil, profit, right? That seems about right. My favorite line from Sorry To Bother You. > So, you making half-human half-horse fucking things so you can make more money? > Yeah, basically. I just didn't want you to think I was crazy. That I was doing this for no reason. Because this isn't irrational.

twobitshifter 5y ago

I think a civilization can be unimaginably rich and still have imaginably poor people toiling away at lower levels. With a laissez-faire system, the economic factors would decide whether machine or man labor is the most cost effective resource. When the mechanized means of production become more intelligent, faster, and accurate, what can the man or woman without any machines of their own do for money? They could work for less than the machines in dangerous conditions, doing the type of work that machines are too valuable for. The optimist can also imagine a utopia where the need to labor vanishes and we collectively benefit from advances in science and technology, but that’s not a given.

hef19898 5y ago
Our history, and a lot of countries right now, proof you right.