Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
In the short term, we should probably focus on fixing our problems on earth. Some space research should still be funded, but not as a major priority. Once we finally have our shit together, we can start exploring the stars.
This is a salient point, but obviously the answer lies in the nuance.
If there were some kind of mars-race and the US and China invest trillions in being the first to put a man on Mars, that seems like it would be a huge waste of resources given that those trillions of dollars would be better spent on rolling out renewables and de-carbonising industries.
On the other hand, methodical, strategic, considered advances into space are appropriate.
Space exploration needs to be balanced against our other objectives.
The US is currently spending billions on an illegal war with Iran. It is hard to say with a straight face that we don't have enough money for space exploration and social programs when we spend our money on that.
It'd be surprising if we haven't either ruined ourselves or achieved an actual end of history by 2300. So, that.
The savings from completely ignoring space aren't what people think, though.
I think the war happens in 2112 actually so a little sooner
Hey, Putin could decide to end it all next year, for all we know. Or maybe AI arrives in 2040 and is already well on it's way to total paperclip conversion of Earth by 2112.
On the other hand, if everything goes pretty straightforwardly some of the same people will be around in 2112, and some but not all of the same geopolitical and social divisions, as well. That stuff settles out over decades, and there's only 9 decades to 2112.
I see what you're saying but reality is, we'll never get our shit together perfectly. We'll never advance into space if we wait on that.
Imagine if our ancestors thought that before travelling to new lands or sailing the seas. They wouldn't have gone anywhere.
Most of our ancestors probably did think that before sailing the seas, they were focused on feeding themselves, fighting off diseases and other tribes, learning how to build. While others focused on making boats and sailing. Sailing became what it is now because society survived long enough for sailing to develop. Similarly, if we as a species can keep ourselves alive long enough, gradual progress towards space exploration will develop into much more.
I think thats completely reasonable