3 ms·
That's not economical. A human mission to another planet is far too expensive and risky for the little advertising it would deliver. They could do that already
by slightwinder 1y ago
That's not economical. A human mission to another planet is far too expensive and risky for the little advertising it would deliver. They could do that already on earth, send people to the north/south-poles, or even send them to the moon.. This would all be cheaper and still have similar effects.
But the mindset is probably not wrong. Maybe Jeff Bezos can rent his dick-rocket to Red Bull, so people can spacediving the atmosphere. The necessary security-tech they have to build, will probably very beneficial for actual astronauts later.
- upghost 1y agoI can guarantee you that if someone were to discover that the "Ark of the Covenant" dataset that would unlock AGI was on Venus and it could only be accessed by a meatbag, we'd be sending fleets. Given the current hype it probably doesn't even matter if the claim is true as long as it keeps the capital flowing.
- slightwinder 1y agoThe difference is, that the prospective win from AGI is far bigger than any investment. But an advertisement more expensive than a whole decade's revenue from the company, has hardly any chance to reach the profitable zone.
- TeMPOraL 1y agoThere are many worse ways of spending capital. Even if a false claim of this nature successfully bullshitted some companies or countries into a manned mission to Venus, that would be a net win to humanity compared to what that capital will be allocated otherwise.