31 ms·

Recent tweet from Hans Rosling on space tourism: "Thoughts from Liberia: Space tourism is like Ebola; it's lethal, it's costly and the world is better without i

by mzl 12y ago

Recent tweet from Hans Rosling on space tourism: "Thoughts from Liberia: Space tourism is like Ebola; it's lethal, it's costly and the world is better without it!" (https://twitter.com/HansRosling/status/528308903873089538 https://twitter.com/HansRosling/status/528308903873089538) Personally I'm all for space exploration, but space tourism seems like a non-needed luxury.

Ntrails 12y ago
Luxury? This isn't government funded, and it's no more of a luxury than private jets, or a supercar or whatever else you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on. Most of the first world live their lives based on non-needed luxury and it just seems mad to try and suddenly impose "need" as a requirement of a product.
- avz 12y ago
  Time and again, the luxury of one era becomes a basic need of the next. Legal protection, education, electricity, health care...
  - morsch 12y ago
    And time and time again they don't: Having your own tiger petting zoo, milk baths, private chef... So now we know that luxuries may or may not turn out to be considered basic needs.
    - bencoder 12y ago
      Not disagreeing with the overall point of your comment, but: > private chef I can purchase a pre-prepared meal and heat it up in my microwave by pressing two buttons. That's pretty close!
      - morsch 12y ago
        Agreed, and a similar point can be made regarding private zoos (first world citizens have access to zoos) and milk baths (most of us could afford it but we have even better hygiene products). Some past luxuries were just fads and go out of fashion, others address a lasting need but fail to scale up and remain extravagant luxuries only available to the ultra rich, others still also address a lasting need and are transformed into something that works on a societal level.
- morsch 12y ago
  Agreed. We should strive to increase the access to non-needed luxuries to everyone. There should not be a gap where some people lack access to the luxury of basic healthcare while others have access to space travel. It's possible that the ability to provide basic luxury to more people comes at the cost of reducing access to more high-cost luxuries to others.
- mzl 12y ago
  Apparently I missed the discussion. However, just for clarity. Current space travel uses enormous amounts of fuel, which I see as hard to defend for tourism purposes. It is a luxury in the sense that I'm not sure if tourism is an ok enough reason to spend a limited resource on. It might be insignificant compared to other stuff, butch for me it just feels bad.

by mzl 12y ago

Ntrails 12y ago

Luxury? This isn't government funded, and it's no more of a luxury than private jets, or a supercar or whatever else you spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on. Most of the first world live their lives based on non-needed luxury and it just seems mad to try and suddenly impose "need" as a requirement of a product.

avz 12y ago
Time and again, the luxury of one era becomes a basic need of the next. Legal protection, education, electricity, health care...
- morsch 12y ago
  And time and time again they don't: Having your own tiger petting zoo, milk baths, private chef... So now we know that luxuries may or may not turn out to be considered basic needs.
  - bencoder 12y ago
    Not disagreeing with the overall point of your comment, but: > private chef I can purchase a pre-prepared meal and heat it up in my microwave by pressing two buttons. That's pretty close!
    - morsch 12y ago
      Agreed, and a similar point can be made regarding private zoos (first world citizens have access to zoos) and milk baths (most of us could afford it but we have even better hygiene products). Some past luxuries were just fads and go out of fashion, others address a lasting need but fail to scale up and remain extravagant luxuries only available to the ultra rich, others still also address a lasting need and are transformed into something that works on a societal level.
morsch 12y ago
Agreed. We should strive to increase the access to non-needed luxuries to everyone. There should not be a gap where some people lack access to the luxury of basic healthcare while others have access to space travel. It's possible that the ability to provide basic luxury to more people comes at the cost of reducing access to more high-cost luxuries to others.
mzl 12y ago
Apparently I missed the discussion. However, just for clarity. Current space travel uses enormous amounts of fuel, which I see as hard to defend for tourism purposes. It is a luxury in the sense that I'm not sure if tourism is an ok enough reason to spend a limited resource on. It might be insignificant compared to other stuff, butch for me it just feels bad.