4 ms·
You can have artificial habitats which are almost in any way better than a planet. Even bigger, by a few orders of magnitude, if that's your metric. Maybe that'
by dsign 4y ago
You can have artificial habitats which are almost in any way better than a planet. Even bigger, by a few orders of magnitude, if that's your metric. Maybe that's not something that will be readily available to you during your first millennia in space, but we are talking about larger timescales.
The bigger question is if something that old will want to be bare-organic (as in running in actual wetware), or "virtualized". If the former, bigger, fancy habitats will be wanted. If the later, big and efficient datacenters will be more important. If they are as "we-want-morrrrrrr-choice" as we are, they are going to want a mixture of both.
- wing-_-nuts 4y agoI have to say, I never understood the huge emphasis on colonizing worlds outside our solar system. My pet theory is that by the time we are capable of such a thing (and thus, capable of making spaceships that can sustain human life for the duration of the trip), I'd argue we've become a space native species who are very much used to living our lives on ships. I'm not saying colonization wouldn't happen, but it'd be the thrill seekers looking for something new.
- bayesian_horse 4y agoI think it would be driven by curiosity, but once you colonize another star system, it's a fully fledged civilization without meaningful contact to the mother system. Including to visit the next star system.