|
Casey Finnigan posted:Basically if you care about Mars colonization and space exploration you shouldn't poo poo on the people who are actually concerned about the practicality of it because the science they talk about isn't cool enough It really wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't a constant, consistent thing. Every time one of these threads pop up a bunch of assholes have to pile in to yell "actually extraterrestrial colonization is unrealistic and impractical, get your heads out of the clouds you NERDS". That's not genuine concern, that's just trying to shut down the conversation. Like, literally nobody has a problem with whatever you want to talk about. Nobody's going to try to shut that conversation down. Why does the subject of space colonization get met with such hostility though?
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It really wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't a constant, consistent thing. Every time one of these threads pop up a bunch of assholes have to pile in to yell "actually extraterrestrial colonization is unrealistic and impractical, get your heads out of the clouds you NERDS". That's not genuine concern, that's just trying to shut down the conversation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:It really wouldn't be an issue if it wasn't a constant, consistent thing. Every time one of these threads pop up a bunch of assholes have to pile in to yell "actually extraterrestrial colonization is unrealistic and impractical, get your heads out of the clouds you NERDS". That's not genuine concern, that's just trying to shut down the conversation. Is there any actual news about space colonization or technologies related to space colonization? News on technologies that make spaceflight cheaper, or which address issues humans or other organisms have in space seem like they would be relevant to everyone. If there isn't really much news with regards to space colonization (quite possible), then perhaps we could discuss things that are being worked on right now that would also probably be relevant to that, rather than talk about something that even supporters of it agree will take 50 or 100 years or somesuch, especially since we aren't at any point where research into space colonization and space technology not related to space colonization have not even split off at all? thechosenone fucked around with this message at 18:30 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
Some news about Cassini: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...omepage%2Fstory http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41207827 I have to say, that I kind of felt a tightening of my chest and someone started cutting an onion in the room. Goodbye little space friend! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
thechosenone posted:Is there any actual news about space colonization or technologies related to space colonization? News on technologies that make spaceflight cheaper, or which address issues humans or other organisms have in space seem like they would be relevant to everyone. Yeah, the spaceX stuff, it's super exciting. the falcon 9 successfully has flown and the falcon 9 heavy is about to launch in november and it's a rocket that can carry 9000 pounds to mars . Then if the falcon heavy works, the raptor engines in it will go in the ultra heavy "tanker'. which has 40 something engines and can lift 100 TONS to mars using the same technology. With the launch pad for that being built right this second. So like yeah, there is a specific reason people are excited right now about mars. the raptor engines are reusable and cheaper than any other engine ever built. over the next year and then the next five years humans are gonna get the most access to mars we've ever had. Hundreds of tons is the level you start moving from small probes to "we could send people, we could send habitats". It's not just random. Owlofcreamcheese fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Sep 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Some news about Cassini:
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:someone started cutting an onion in the room. Seriously, just even the writing about it " For a few minutes, the spacecraft's thrusters fought to keep its high-gain antenna pointed toward Earth, so it could continue to send back real-time data from this uncharted territory."
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
The Soviets used a very large number of engines in the 60s and couldn't make it work, although they didn't have modern control systems. I wonder what the margin of error is on engine failures for that big honkin spacecraft SpaceX showed in its Mars CG mission.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The Soviets used a very large number of engines in the 60s and couldn't make it work, although they didn't have modern control systems. I wonder what the margin of error is on engine failures for that big honkin spacecraft SpaceX showed in its Mars CG mission. I know they made a big deal on the falcon heavy that they built everything 40% over the required specs where NASA only builds things 25% over because they want to be ultra conservative on safety and because they can spec it up later if it's going well.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
Gum posted:There are references people experiencing relief after leaving their immediate area but nothing to suggest that these people were initially awake. On the contrary it talks about how these 'attacks' happen at night in people's homes and their description of a typical incident involves someone waking up with a ringing in their ears. Yeah, everything at this point is purely speculative so I don't want to sound like I have any idea what's going on here. Mostly stuff like this: http://gizmodo.com/the-case-of-a-brain-damaging-sonic-weapon-in-cuba-is-on-1809501927 quote:According to the AP, the US government is uncertain about nearly every aspect of this case. It doesn’t know how the attacks happened, who is responsible, or why they did it. The officials who were not authorized to speak on the record said that “at least some of the incidents were confined to specific rooms or even parts of rooms with laser-like specificity, baffling U.S. officials who say the facts and the physics don’t add up.” makes it seems like there's enough here that everyone involved is taking this pretty seriously as some kind of deliberate act.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Some news about Cassini Cool rear end little mutt that had to navigate Cold War tom-foolery and proposed budget cuts to even make it out there, but drat if nearly 20 years isn't a good run. Lakes on Titan, storms on Saturn, that shot of Earth far off in the distance, it witnessed some amazing things. It's why people get jazzed about recent developments making it cheaper and faster to get things into orbit: The cheaper and faster it is, the more stuff will get done, the more things like Cassini will get launched.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Mulva posted:Cool rear end little mutt that had to navigate Cold War tom-foolery and proposed budget cuts to even make it out there, but drat if nearly 20 years isn't a good run. Lakes on Titan, storms on Saturn, that shot of Earth far off in the distance, it witnessed some amazing things. It's why people get jazzed about recent developments making it cheaper and faster to get things into orbit: The cheaper and faster it is, the more stuff will get done, the more things like Cassini will get launched. I think what makes it really sad is that cassini is kinda the last probe. Someone could make more later but for the first time in a long time there is not really much "en route" anywhere. Just proposals for probes. Like the Japan asteroid stuff next year is about it for probes. And new horizons will be functional till like 2040 or something and send some data about something back but nothing else is launched and on it's way for the first time in a while. Like even if everyone gets super excited about space right this second and we get going ASAP, it's years till probes would reach stuff and that is super sad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:Some news about Cassini: Feeling bad for abandoned space equipment, eh? My favorite story is that of the Buran:   
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Yeah, everything at this point is purely speculative so I don't want to sound like I have any idea what's going on here. Mostly stuff like this: The brain damage part makes me think high power microwaves but you would think at the level required to do that they would be showing other obvious effects like cataracts but the "minute long bursts" thing from the guardian article might account for the lack of that
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think what makes it really sad is that cassini is kinda the last probe. Someone could make more later but for the first time in a long time there is not really much "en route" anywhere. Just proposals for probes. Then there's a new Venera by Russia that's going to drop some balloons or a glider or something to look at the atmosphere even more, but that's not likely until 2025 or so.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Akatsuki is still happily going around Venus looking at the atmosphere, and BepiColombo will flyby Venus on it's way to look at Mercury. I guess I wasn't counting venus stuff since you launch that and it's there in less than a year. I mean cassini is the last of the long travel time probes that we've had a "next one" en route pretty much every time one is done. Now none are en route so even if we decide right now we really want to see photos of distant planets it's gonna be decades before we do. (venus is exciting too and I'm excited about other stuff we are doing, but we took a break on distant probes and we are just going to live with that for many years now)
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is taking off in China and Nature did a piece on it. Basically make a number of embryos, screen them for genetic abnormalities and implant one that doesn't have whatever you are testing for. The focus is currently on genetic defects such as Downs Syndrome, Huntington's etc. with some laws to prevent screening for intelligence, height, athleticism etc. The article is kinda big so I'm not posting the whole text but the gist is: Nature posted:Early experiments are beginning to show how genome-editing technologies such as CRISPR might one day fix disease-causing mutations before embryos are implanted. But refining the techniques and getting regulatory approval will take years. PGD has already helped thousands of couples. And whereas the expansion of PGD around the world has generally been slow, in China, it is starting to explode. Nature posted:Chinese researchers are also looking for more disease-associated gene variants, specifically to expand the impact of PGD. The most concentrated efforts are being orchestrated by He Lin, a geneticist at Shanghai Jiao Tong University. He has set out an ambitious project: to pin down all the mutations in all the genes that cause diseases and put them into a single database. “We just do them one by one until we get the whole set,” he says, referring to the roughly 6,000 known genetic diseases. As disease–gene links are verified, they could be added to the list of things that PGD can screen for. Getting rid of genetic defects will make for a healthier and more uniform population but if it remains the domain of the wealthy one wonders how sympathetic they'll be to the impure poors. I also don't think you can control it. How hard is it going to be to bribe a geneticist to screen for whatever? Seems like there would be a constant pressure to include more and more things as abnormal. So that's happening.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
Yeah the possibility of improved genetic screening resulting in some kind of horrible biological inequality is pretty scary and once we have the capacity to do it I don't see how that genie could be put back in the bottle. Maybe the first Richie Rich kids to be born with optimized genes will be horrifically deformed and people will lose interest on their own.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
I feel like some people haven't seen Gattaca. Or took the wrong lessons. ... it's the latter, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 23:06
|
|
|
People are getting more and more terrified to even cook and eat genetically modified stuff, people won't even vaccinate their own dumb kids even when it's free. I think if anything we are going to see the opposite: a bunch of extremely effective treatments and preventatives for a bunch of horrific diseases that sit rotting on shelves illegal or stigmatized because a bunch of sci-fi used genetics as a boogie man one too many times and now everyone can say "brave new world" or "gattica" anytime anyone wants to not have their kid not die at the age of 4 with their brain rotting in their skull from Tay–Sachs disease.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2017 23:24
|
|
|
People seem to be so wrapped up in how this would exacerbate inequality but it seems to me that this treatment could easily be rolled into universal healthcare. In fact it would be in the government's best interest to do so. You wouldn't want your country to fall behind in the super-human arms race. That's assuming it ever gets to that point. We have trouble even defining intelligence much less knowing what genes to select for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
Joe Desperado posted:People seem to be so wrapped up in how this would exacerbate inequality but it seems to me that this treatment could easily be rolled into universal healthcare. In fact it would be in the government's best interest to do so. You wouldn't want your country to fall behind in the super-human arms race. Even if it would be in the best interest of the countries rich enough to universally improve their population, then people who live in poor countries have suddenly become a biologically disadvantaged underclass. I really don't see any way how tech like this wouldn't lead to nasty inequality on a genetic level. But yeah we are a long time from having to worry about it yet Casey Finnigan fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Sep 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
It's weird when people do the "technology X would disproportionately advantage the rich!" like 8 people own half the wealth while 80% of the world's population shares 5%. Like we all got a fair shot now and it's only when rich people get cybereyes or designer genes or vampire powers that we finally lose the meritocracy we got and they finally get unfairly over advantaged? Like it is gonna suck real bad when rich people can get cybernetic hearts and live to be 230 years old while someone else is dying at 3 from dirty drinking water, but it seems like the rich and the powerful already have gotten to rule at their whims and it doesn't feel like a few more advantages really change the relationship or the dynamic. Like becoming actually inhuman instead of just metaphorically inhuman is a powerful symbolic step, but not even one in their favor if it mattered at all either way (which it wouldn't).
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:01
|
|
|
Casey Finnigan posted:Even if it would be in the best interest of the countries rich enough to universally improve their population, then people who live in poor countries have suddenly become a biologically disadvantaged underclass. I really don't see any way how tech like this wouldn't lead to nasty inequality on a genetic level. But yeah we are a long time from having to worry about it yet People in poor countries already are biologically disadvantaged. People in poor countries are all kinda hosed up. They have lifelong malnutrition and hookworms and lead poisoning and that bad health translates to real and meaningful effects on their biological D&D stats. Like look at height:  or IQ:  or life expectancy:  Even at birth having a hosed up pregnancy starts your life with reduced biological capabilities which is already a thing poor people are vastly more likely to get. Rich countries already generate people that are biologically greatly advantaged. Being deprived at a young age harms people in a fundamental and unrecoverable way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
Dairy Days posted:The brain damage part makes me think high power microwaves but you would think at the level required to do that they would be showing other obvious effects like cataracts but the "minute long bursts" thing from the guardian article might account for the lack of that You could probably do something with an ultrasound machine - they can break kidney stones with em, so I'd imagine having one rattling your skull wouldn't be a very happy funtime. They probably had them setup under the head of the bed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Yeah I know inequality is already bad and has probably been for as long as wealth has existed. And yes people living in poorer countries are at a serious biological disadvantage already due to issues of public health. But in an abstract sense you can at least know that the rich shitbag crushing you under the weight of his wealth is still just a person who is theoretically no better or worse than any other person. Having a class of people who are literally superhuman because of their wealth might not materially change all that much considering how horrific inequality is right now anyway but it's, you know, viscerally horrible. Just my opinion man. Just my opinion bro For the moment genetic screening to prevent genetic disease is a good thing and if I'm not wrong I'm pretty sure modern science doesn't know how to selectively edit a genome to enhance intelligence and stuff so we can all just relax and comfort ourselves in the knowledge that the world is only grossly inequal in terms of wealth and access to resources and education etc. and plenty of people capable of becoming geniuses are starving in a slum somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Casey Finnigan posted:Yeah I know inequality is already bad and has probably been for as long as wealth has existed. And yes people living in poorer countries are at a serious biological disadvantage already due to issues of public health. But in an abstract sense you can at least know that the rich shitbag crushing you under the weight of his wealth is still just a person who is theoretically no better or worse than any other person. Having a class of people who are literally superhuman because of their wealth might not materially change all that much considering how horrific inequality is right now anyway but it's, you know, viscerally horrible. Just my opinion man. Just my opinion bro The point of the maps is that inequality already makes richer people biologically advantaged. I grew up with enough food and because of it I'm a lot smarter than people in poor areas that grew up starving. I bought my way to having a better functioning brain and body than they could afford to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:37
|
|
|
Yeah I'm saying that for me there's a philosophical difference between a person being at a disadvantage because of unfortunate circumstances early in their life vs a person being at a disadvantage because the people they're compared to were literally built from the ground up to be better than them. I can easily see why other people wouldn't think that there's a difference (both cases are just luck of the draw and circumstances of birth) but I do think that there is. They made a movie about it so apparently some other people agree with me. On the other hand the technology to selectively modify DNA at a really fine level along with the knowledge of how to effectively edit it (which would be required to make the superbabies) would probably be an absolutely amazing breakthrough that would result in massive benefits so I gotta say that's an end goal that humanity should be working toward. I just think the super god inequality poo poo is gonna be an inevitable part of it and for whatever reason that bothers me more than regular inequality does. Hence why my hope would be that something happens that makes genetically modifying your kids to be amazing unpopular and we can focus on doing things like reducing world hunger and curing diseases with that technology instead. Casey Finnigan fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Sep 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
I think another thing is that technology disproportionately benefits wealth over poverty but that kinda mostly means developed vs developing nations. Or at least impoverished vs middle class. There isn't as much ultrarich only technology. Like billionaires sometimes glue diamonds to their iphones but they still have iphones, and a top of the line computer is better than a regular dell but isn't really transformatively different in capabilities. Even medical stuff, It's access to the head of some waiting list and in america it's some hosed up stuff about how care works but there is mostly wide overlap on what medicines a billionaire can get and someone making 50,000 a year with insurance can get. Like technology is not fairly distributed, it totally passes over improving the life of someone in a slum in india. But there is less technology that sticks around as millionaires or billionaires only. There is some, but it's not the most common pattern. If biohacked god children turn out to be a thing it'll probably break down as first world people being 7 foot tall ultra geniuses while south america gets to keep their stock bodies instead of like bill gates getting to have good children while normal joe in america doesn't. There just aren't too many technologies that stick as being ultra rich things compared to global rich. Being rich is more about being able to command people, buy more luxurious versions of things and not having to pick or choose among possibilities of what to buy while most technologies tend more towards "if you are middle class you can have one of whatever but maybe you save up for it and it's a bigger deal to get" Like none of that makes it good or okay, but I don't really buy the idea of specifically the ultra millionaires somehow only having access to future tech. Since that stuff tends to hit at least first world mainstream and leave out developing areas and impoverished classes of people, instead of billionares lording over us by having the only computers or wireless phones or whatever. Owlofcreamcheese fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Sep 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 04:26
|
|
|
Casey Finnigan posted:Yeah I'm saying that for me there's a philosophical difference between a person being at a disadvantage because of unfortunate circumstances early in their life vs a person being at a disadvantage because the people they're compared to were literally built from the ground up to be better than them. People raised on a protein-rich diet are literally built from the ground up better than children with protein deficient diets.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Hey so about Cassini being the last probe, NASA decided to cancel its Advanced radioisotope generator program and go with the design that's 40 years old and uses four times the plutonium it needs to. Except now because that program is cancelled there's only enough plutonium for like 0 generators and there won't be more in the pipeline for years. The hilarious thing is they had to cancel the program just to pay for radioisotopes generators that were too large and expensive because they are obsolete because the program to update them was cancelled to pay for large obsolete expensive radioisotope generators which haven't been updated because the program to update them was cancelled to pay for expensive obsolete generators and so on. But of course the space station was more important than maintaining our ability to do deep space science into the 21st century. This is exactly the sort of story that should make us wary when choosing goals for space exploration; the shuttle and the station, and shuttle trips to build the station, ate up years and years of funding. Now we don't have launch vehicles and we don't have capsules and we don't have power supplies for deep space probes. And for that we traded a manned presence in low earth orbit. The space station is pretty cool for doing microgravity experiments but its an object lesson in the trade-off of space funding. It will be half a decade before NASA can start building another Cassini style probe, as a direct result of choosing expensive but relatively unambitious manned space flight projects over robot science platforms. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Sep 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 04:43
|
|
|
It seems less like anyone chose to only do the space station and more like the us has lost or scaled back production of every type of launch system to the point low earth orbit is about all we regularly handle. And if low earth orbit is all we have we might as well do what we can there. Which is satellites and the space station. I think the cause and effect is more "they canceled heavy atlas and Vulcan is super fake and there is no space shuttle has meant we basically are working mostly on one off rockets and soyez launches and stuck dicking around barely off earth. I think they canceled the rockets then NASA focused on low earth orbit because it's where we had ready access. Not NASA picked low earth orbit then decided to not build any rockets anymore.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 05:32
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It seems less like anyone chose to only do the space station and more like the us has lost or scaled back production of every type of launch system to the point low earth orbit is about all we regularly handle. And if low earth orbit is all we have we might as well do what we can there. Choosing to do something means choosing not to do other things. Choosing to do something that takes 20 years shapes all your other choices.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 06:42
|
|
|
Casey Finnigan posted:On the other hand the technology to selectively modify DNA at a really fine level along with the knowledge of how to effectively edit it (which would be required to make the superbabies) would probably be an absolutely amazing breakthrough that would result in massive benefits so I gotta say that's an end goal that humanity should be working toward. I just think the super god inequality poo poo is gonna be an inevitable part of it and for whatever reason that bothers me more than regular inequality does. Hence why my hope would be that something happens that makes genetically modifying your kids to be amazing unpopular and we can focus on doing things like reducing world hunger and curing diseases with that technology instead. You don't need gene editing and that's the thing. It's not designer babies or genetic engineering - it's a backdoor that gets you to the same place although it'll take a little longer. Like say you create a profile of the genetically ideal person, then create 100 embryos and select the one that comes closest to that profile. Then the next generation does the same thing and the next and so on. You can make 1000 embryos or 10000 and although it has diminishing returns it'll speed it up but either way you'll end up in basically the same place. So you're not aborting a fetus, you're not editing or designing or doing any of those things that a lot of people would instinctively object to. You're preferring one embryo over another and there will be no objective way to prove why you preferred that particular one so the net result is the same as designer babies just over a few generations. But yeah I don't care that much if some people are taller and can jump higher etc. It's health and lifespans that are the real kicker and it's more the risk that everybody won't be able to benefit from it. In developed countries at least it could become a part of regular healthcare but there will be groups that will insist doing it the natural way. How seriously people will take that schism will be interesting. Arglebargle III posted:Choosing to do something means choosing not to do other things. Choosing to do something that takes 20 years shapes all your other choices. Well NASA has stated pretty bluntly that they're ditching low earth orbit and leaving it to commercial interests. The crew resupply missions act as a funding mechanism to get commercial providers started and then hopefully they can find something to do in LEO while NASA is focusing their budget on stuff in cislunar space. Whatever one feel about manned spaceflight I think it 's the right choice - we need to push new boundaries and the ISS is just eating too much of the budget for too little.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 08:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:hookworms We don't fully know if that's correlation or causation, it could be the kind of less sanitary environment that leads to getting helminths also leads to a lower likelihood of autoimmune dysfunction, but there have been positive trial results from helminthic therapy, and at the very least the side effects of hookworm in the first world (you take an iron supplement if you get anemic, you take a worming pill if you get too many) seem far preferable to the side effects of antimetabolite type autoimmune medications (bone marrow problems, nausea and vomiting, a not insignificant chance of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma). However because of the understandable reluctance of the medical community to infect people with tropical diseases that we only got rid of a few decades ago, there's also a lot of scammy internet poo poo. In conclusion; hookworms, maybe our friends sometimes?  Hi!
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 10:43
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:
Multiple sclerosis seems like the big deal one. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4374592/ "Animal studies using the MS mouse model of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) has suggested a protective effect of helminth infections on CNS disease progression [36,37] and a prospective study demonstrated that 12 MS patients infected with a variety of helminth infections had significantly fewer relapses and lower MRI activity when compared to 12 non-helminth infected MS patients over a time period of 4.5 years [38]. In a follow up study it was further shown than when these patients received anti-helminthic treatment their clinical presentation deteriorated" Like I wonder how many of those people that got cured from the worms and had their MS deteriorate immediately went to roll around in some poopy mud for a while to get them back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2017 14:08
|
|
|
There's a lot of fear mongering and handwringing over science fiction fantasies. Designer babies arent happening anytime soon. Neither are robots that steal peoples jobs. Its all silly crap that nerds obsess over but which arent real. Same with space travel. I think the 21st century is going to be a lot more boring and mundane than people want to admit. Climate change will gently caress things up for sure, as will more inequality, wars and so on. But there isnt going to be any silly sci-fi poo poo like killer robots, clones, nanobots, whatever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Blue Star posted:There's a lot of fear mongering and handwringing over science fiction fantasies. Designer babies arent happening anytime soon. Neither are robots that steal peoples jobs. Its all silly crap that nerds obsess over but which arent real. Same with space travel. We have had kuller robots for 50 yeats and jobs have routinely been made obsolete by automation for at least that long. We've been cloning animals for 10+ yeats. It's not sci-fi - we're living it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2017 11:56
|
|