3 ms·

I cannot understand why these kind of projects lack funding. Is there no super rich person on this planet who is obsessed with the thought of extraterrestrial l

by 3rd3 12y ago

I cannot understand why these kind of projects lack funding. Is there no super rich person on this planet who is obsessed with the thought of extraterrestrial life?

frik 12y ago
Paul Allen (Microsoft co-founder) is interested in SETI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Telescope_Array http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Telescope_Array Overall Paul Allen has contributed more than $30 million to the project. He may not know yet that Arecibo Observatory needs help though :/ Triva: he is also looking for a wife http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IM0SvIiMI4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IM0SvIiMI4
melling 12y ago
I cannot understand why people keep turning to the super rich to solve problems. There are 7 billion people on the planet. Isn't it time that the 1 billion of us who appear super rich to the other 6 billion, do little more?
- 3rd3 12y ago
  I think you misunderstood what I said. I only facetiously pointed out that given these projects lack funding one could conclude that there is no super rich person on this planet which cares about extraterrestrial life (e.g. as a hobby).
  - melling 12y ago
    I was simply trying to point out that "the rest of us" could try and contribute a little more to various goals rather than rely on the super rich. Most readers here are much better off than most other people on the planet. Wouldn't it be great if there was a better way to contribute to "citizen science", for example?
- ZenPro 12y ago
  What else could they do with super-riches? shrug Ultimately, as evidenced by history, most super-rich reach a stage of life where they realise the riches in themselves were just a way to keep score and large philanthropic contributions ensue. It's a serious philosophical question; once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured there is very little left to spend money on other than initiatives that benefit mankind or the natural world.
  - PavlovsCat 12y ago
    Funnily enough, greed seems to occur more often in those who don't really need it anymore. > once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured .. you stop focusing on accumulating more wealth - unless those aren't the real goals, and the driving force is something less wholesome. There are natural limits on the wealth a sane person can achieve, unless they inherit or get incredibly (un?)lucky, but numbers can keep rising long after they lost any connection to anything "real", and just like in gaming, people can get and stay stuck to that. And as long as they keep "winning", only the very best get a chance to pause and reflect.
  - deciplex 12y ago
    "Most"? Certainly "some" - most is debatable. I'd like to see some numbers. There is certainly no shortage of super-rich who hit that point and... just keep going, because for those types it was never about the money - it was about the power. And while more wealth might give diminishing returns, power really doesn't, yet remains directly proportional to wealth. (For me, this is the best reason to tax the rich - it's not about revenues per se, rather it is about avoiding extremely dense accumulations of political power.)
- gtirloni 12y ago
  While I totally agree with the call for more responsibility from the rest of us, the effort require to convince, coordinate and collect such money from 1 billion people would be extraordinary. Better to convince a few people that have already done the "cash aggregation" throughout their lives :)
  - thom 12y ago
    Isn't this called 'tax'?

by 3rd3 12y ago

I cannot understand why these kind of projects lack funding. Is there no super rich person on this planet who is obsessed with the thought of extraterrestrial life?

frik 12y ago

Paul Allen (Microsoft co-founder) is interested in SETI: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Telescope_Array http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Telescope_Array Overall Paul Allen has contributed more than $30 million to the project. He may not know yet that Arecibo Observatory needs help though :/ Triva: he is also looking for a wife http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IM0SvIiMI4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IM0SvIiMI4

melling 12y ago

I cannot understand why people keep turning to the super rich to solve problems. There are 7 billion people on the planet. Isn't it time that the 1 billion of us who appear super rich to the other 6 billion, do little more?

3rd3 12y ago
I think you misunderstood what I said. I only facetiously pointed out that given these projects lack funding one could conclude that there is no super rich person on this planet which cares about extraterrestrial life (e.g. as a hobby).
- melling 12y ago
  I was simply trying to point out that "the rest of us" could try and contribute a little more to various goals rather than rely on the super rich. Most readers here are much better off than most other people on the planet. Wouldn't it be great if there was a better way to contribute to "citizen science", for example?
ZenPro 12y ago
What else could they do with super-riches? shrug Ultimately, as evidenced by history, most super-rich reach a stage of life where they realise the riches in themselves were just a way to keep score and large philanthropic contributions ensue. It's a serious philosophical question; once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured there is very little left to spend money on other than initiatives that benefit mankind or the natural world.
- PavlovsCat 12y ago
  Funnily enough, greed seems to occur more often in those who don't really need it anymore. > once [1] family financial security and [2]a high quality of life has been secured .. you stop focusing on accumulating more wealth - unless those aren't the real goals, and the driving force is something less wholesome. There are natural limits on the wealth a sane person can achieve, unless they inherit or get incredibly (un?)lucky, but numbers can keep rising long after they lost any connection to anything "real", and just like in gaming, people can get and stay stuck to that. And as long as they keep "winning", only the very best get a chance to pause and reflect.
- deciplex 12y ago
  "Most"? Certainly "some" - most is debatable. I'd like to see some numbers. There is certainly no shortage of super-rich who hit that point and... just keep going, because for those types it was never about the money - it was about the power. And while more wealth might give diminishing returns, power really doesn't, yet remains directly proportional to wealth. (For me, this is the best reason to tax the rich - it's not about revenues per se, rather it is about avoiding extremely dense accumulations of political power.)
gtirloni 12y ago
While I totally agree with the call for more responsibility from the rest of us, the effort require to convince, coordinate and collect such money from 1 billion people would be extraordinary. Better to convince a few people that have already done the "cash aggregation" throughout their lives :)
- thom 12y ago
  Isn't this called 'tax'?