6 ms·

> but the outcome of staring at your feet is just as likely to be catastrophic as staring only at the horizon is Can you list which risks you believe are mitig

> but the outcome of staring at your feet is just as likely to be catastrophic as staring only at the horizon is Can you list which risks you believe are mitigated by space travel?

cosmic_cheese 1y ago
The risk is never developing the ability because it never became politically beneficial to do so or never judged to be worth it in the short term and in the worst case scenario losing our chance to do it altogether (there’s nothing guaranteeing that we’ll always have our current ability to escape Earth’s gravity well or even get into orbit). We’ll never get good at things we don’t do and the related technology doesn’t just develop itself. Without intentional efforts to push the space forward, it’ll forever be stuck in limbo.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  This is only a problem if one already accepts your premise that space travel is important.
  - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
    As noted before, it’s less about the ability itself and more about the things it enables further down the line. The cultural and scientific output by a far-future version of humanity that spans the solar system and beyond will absolutely dwarf that of a future where we’ve allowed ourselves to become root-bound on earth, and accordingly it’s much more likely to unlock the mysteries of the universe and figure out better ways to live. When I think of that, precluding any of it as a possibility feels borderline malicious and negligent. I accept that this is something that depends on an individual’s values, though. Many don’t care about anything that won’t impact them personally while they’re still alive, and in some ways that’s valid, if frustrating.
    - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
      But I asked what does it enable. And no, you’ve gotten my value system wrong. I’m all for investing in both the near and far future, but there needs to be a pretty clear and believable hypothesis as to what that investment will yield. Space travel is valuable because it will yield space travel is totally unconvincing!
      - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
        I thought it was explained well enough in the previous reply, but to break it down: The ability to live on other planets and in freefloating crafts does a few things. First, it cracks open access to vast amounts of resources to support populations and allows many environmentally detrimental processes to be moved away from Earth. Second, it gives infinite space to expand into. Third, it opens up a permanently available frontier for the most resetless individuals to pursue, acting as a societal pressure release valve that enhances stability. More people means more artists, philosphers, scientists, researchers, etc, which naturally means both a greater quantity and wider variety of art and science being pursued, meaning more ideas and more problems solved. By contrast, staying bound to Earth puts a hard cap on everything (especially if sustainability, which necessitates a much more limited existence, is a goal). Hopefully somebody else can express it more eloquently, but that’s the general idea.
        sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        > it cracks open access to vast amounts of resources to support populations and allows many environmentally detrimental processes to be moved away from Earth What resources? What "environmentally detrimental processes" actually possibly justify expending the energy required to leave and re-enter earth orbit? Sorry but I've looked into this, and unless you can provide specific examples I haven't encountered (none of which make sense mathematically), you're just sharing sci-fi vignettes. And in any case, none of this requires manned space flight. > Second, it gives infinite space to expand into. We are nowhere near any constraint on physical space on earth and we will not be near this constraint any time in the near, medium, or even far future. > Third, it opens up a permanently available frontier for the most resetless individuals to pursue, acting as a societal pressure release valve that enhances stability. Do you have any evidence for this claim? > By contrast, staying bound to Earth puts a hard cap on everything. A cap that we are absolutely nowhere near hitting and that continues to get pushed further away with every dollar spent on technological investment on earth, which space-fetish dollars pull from.
singleshot_ 1y ago
The inability to move through space comes to mind, which would immediately become a problem worth solving if one considers the possibility of a serious situation in the space where we are now, or even the space we might occupy in the future.
- sorcerer-mar 1y ago
  The risks that we need to pour massive amounts of capital and human capital into is: The risk that risks might emerge?

> but the outcome of staring at your feet is just as likely to be catastrophic as staring only at the horizon is Can you list which risks you believe are mitigated by space travel?

cosmic_cheese 1y ago

The risk is never developing the ability because it never became politically beneficial to do so or never judged to be worth it in the short term and in the worst case scenario losing our chance to do it altogether (there’s nothing guaranteeing that we’ll always have our current ability to escape Earth’s gravity well or even get into orbit). We’ll never get good at things we don’t do and the related technology doesn’t just develop itself. Without intentional efforts to push the space forward, it’ll forever be stuck in limbo.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
This is only a problem if one already accepts your premise that space travel is important.
- cosmic_cheese 1y ago
  As noted before, it’s less about the ability itself and more about the things it enables further down the line. The cultural and scientific output by a far-future version of humanity that spans the solar system and beyond will absolutely dwarf that of a future where we’ve allowed ourselves to become root-bound on earth, and accordingly it’s much more likely to unlock the mysteries of the universe and figure out better ways to live. When I think of that, precluding any of it as a possibility feels borderline malicious and negligent. I accept that this is something that depends on an individual’s values, though. Many don’t care about anything that won’t impact them personally while they’re still alive, and in some ways that’s valid, if frustrating.
  - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
    But I asked what does it enable. And no, you’ve gotten my value system wrong. I’m all for investing in both the near and far future, but there needs to be a pretty clear and believable hypothesis as to what that investment will yield. Space travel is valuable because it will yield space travel is totally unconvincing!
    - cosmic_cheese 1y ago
      I thought it was explained well enough in the previous reply, but to break it down: The ability to live on other planets and in freefloating crafts does a few things. First, it cracks open access to vast amounts of resources to support populations and allows many environmentally detrimental processes to be moved away from Earth. Second, it gives infinite space to expand into. Third, it opens up a permanently available frontier for the most resetless individuals to pursue, acting as a societal pressure release valve that enhances stability. More people means more artists, philosphers, scientists, researchers, etc, which naturally means both a greater quantity and wider variety of art and science being pursued, meaning more ideas and more problems solved. By contrast, staying bound to Earth puts a hard cap on everything (especially if sustainability, which necessitates a much more limited existence, is a goal). Hopefully somebody else can express it more eloquently, but that’s the general idea.
      - sorcerer-mar 1y ago
        > it cracks open access to vast amounts of resources to support populations and allows many environmentally detrimental processes to be moved away from Earth What resources? What "environmentally detrimental processes" actually possibly justify expending the energy required to leave and re-enter earth orbit? Sorry but I've looked into this, and unless you can provide specific examples I haven't encountered (none of which make sense mathematically), you're just sharing sci-fi vignettes. And in any case, none of this requires manned space flight. > Second, it gives infinite space to expand into. We are nowhere near any constraint on physical space on earth and we will not be near this constraint any time in the near, medium, or even far future. > Third, it opens up a permanently available frontier for the most resetless individuals to pursue, acting as a societal pressure release valve that enhances stability. Do you have any evidence for this claim? > By contrast, staying bound to Earth puts a hard cap on everything. A cap that we are absolutely nowhere near hitting and that continues to get pushed further away with every dollar spent on technological investment on earth, which space-fetish dollars pull from.

singleshot_ 1y ago

The inability to move through space comes to mind, which would immediately become a problem worth solving if one considers the possibility of a serious situation in the space where we are now, or even the space we might occupy in the future.

sorcerer-mar 1y ago
The risks that we need to pour massive amounts of capital and human capital into is: The risk that risks might emerge?