Is it time for us to start working on leaving the planet?

[Keith&Co.]

And, yes, I know we would lose a very small fraction to entropy.

How do you know this? What are your numbers? What's the source for your numbers?
You just hope that technology will eventually support your dream?

And since it's a closed system, you do realize the loss through entropy will be cumulative, right?
Even if it's only .001%/day, that's .001% every single day for the entire life of the colony, right? At what point would you say this 'very small fraction' becomes 'a problem?'

 

[ryan]

Um....non-profit does not mean that there won't be costs to build a spaceship. Just that the benefits to the partners is not in the form of profits.

I am the one who brought up non-profit; why are you telling me how it works if I brought it up? What is going on here?

I don't feel like there is a chance of any kind of intelligent flow to a conversation here.

You still have to get money from somewhere to build the spaceship and load the spaceship and train the spaceship crew and advertise to get 'just the right sort' of colonists and security to keep the wrong sort of colonists off the spaceship until it launches.

The first part is obvious and not really worth mentioning. The last part is just trolling.

So either someone has to give you money for the spaceship effort, or you will produce goods/services that people will pay you for.
You still have to have people paying for the spaceship, ryan.

If this is going to be what you think is worthy of even mentioning, then you are not really into this discussion. So there is no reason to continue this conversation any further.

And unless you recruit only billionaires, you're going to need other people to pay for it.

Yes, I can see billionaires interested in this. But there is also many other ways to raise money.

But you are paying for space programs that you may not totally agree with anyway.

There's a difference between research platforms with no immediately visible benefit to me and a program that's designed to permanently remove resources from the planet and never return any benefits to me.

It's not just up to. You can't claim the resources anymore than anyone else can. Everyone gets a say in this, and everyone will have to compromise.

 

[bilby]

I am the one who brought up non-profit; why are you telling me how it works if I brought it up? What is going on here?

I don't feel like there is a chance of any kind of intelligent flow to a conversation here.

You still have to get money from somewhere to build the spaceship and load the spaceship and train the spaceship crew and advertise to get 'just the right sort' of colonists and security to keep the wrong sort of colonists off the spaceship until it launches.

The first part is obvious and not really worth mentioning. The last part is just trolling.

So either someone has to give you money for the spaceship effort, or you will produce goods/services that people will pay you for.
You still have to have people paying for the spaceship, ryan.

If this is going to be what you think is worthy of even mentioning, then you are not really into this discussion. So there is no reason to continue this conversation any further.

And unless you recruit only billionaires, you're going to need other people to pay for it.

Yes, I can see billionaires interested in this. But there is also many other ways to raise money.

But you are paying for space programs that you may not totally agree with anyway.

There's a difference between research platforms with no immediately visible benefit to me and a program that's designed to permanently remove resources from the planet and never return any benefits to me.

It's not just up to. You can't claim the resources anymore than anyone else can. Everyone gets a say in this, and everyone will have to compromise.

History tells us that when one man stands up and says 'I have a great idea, but everyone will have to compromise', unless he already has control of a powerful and loyal army, the only person who actually ends up having to compromise is himself.

Face it Ryan, if you want the world to do your bidding, you need to become a lot more influential, and a lot less confrontational, because you are outnumbered by somewhere around eight orders of magnitude.

Coming here and telling us all we are too stupid to understand your plans, or too hidebound to accept them, is not making them more likely to come to pass; by your own standards, you are engaged in a baffling waste of your valuable time.

If you want to garner support for your position, you have to sell it. Nobody is going to buy something from someone who is happy to declare them an idiot to their face.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I am the one who brought up non-profit; why are you telling me how it works if I brought it up?

You bring up a lot of shit you don't seem to understand, or your understanding is skewed to the rest of the world.
On the subject of why people would contribute to you spaceship, you declare that it's a non-profit, not a charity. Why the hell does that make a difference? People still need to pay for your spaceship. You need resources to build it. Unless you own enough to liquidate and take care of that, you'll need some from other people, no matter how you structure the ownership.

I don't feel like there is a chance of any kind of intelligent flow to a conversation here.

Ow, a touch! I do confess it! I fear i breathe my last!

Feh.

 

[ryan]

I am the one who brought up non-profit; why are you telling me how it works if I brought it up? What is going on here?

I don't feel like there is a chance of any kind of intelligent flow to a conversation here.



The first part is obvious and not really worth mentioning. The last part is just trolling.

So either someone has to give you money for the spaceship effort, or you will produce goods/services that people will pay you for.
You still have to have people paying for the spaceship, ryan.

If this is going to be what you think is worthy of even mentioning, then you are not really into this discussion. So there is no reason to continue this conversation any further.

And unless you recruit only billionaires, you're going to need other people to pay for it.

Yes, I can see billionaires interested in this. But there is also many other ways to raise money.

But you are paying for space programs that you may not totally agree with anyway.

There's a difference between research platforms with no immediately visible benefit to me and a program that's designed to permanently remove resources from the planet and never return any benefits to me.

It's not just up to. You can't claim the resources anymore than anyone else can. Everyone gets a say in this, and everyone will have to compromise.

History tells us that when one man stands up and says 'I have a great idea, but everyone will have to compromise', unless he already has control of a powerful and loyal army, the only person who actually ends up having to compromise is himself.

Face it Ryan, if you want the world to do your bidding, you need to become a lot more influential, and a lot less confrontational, because you are outnumbered by somewhere around eight orders of magnitude.

Coming here and telling us all we are too stupid to understand your plans, or too hidebound to accept them, is not making them more likely to come to pass; by your own standards, you are engaged in a baffling waste of your valuable time.

If you want to garner support for your position, you have to sell it. Nobody is going to buy something from someone who is happy to declare them an idiot to their face.

There were some deeply disturbing things that you and others said about this. I have learnt a lot, probably more than I wanted to.

Regardless, it has been a learning experience, and I will now process it.

 

[ryan]

You bring up a lot of shit you don't seem to understand, or your understanding is skewed to the rest of the world.
On the subject of why people would contribute to you spaceship, you declare that it's a non-profit, not a charity. Why the hell does that make a difference? People still need to pay for your spaceship. You need resources to build it. Unless you own enough to liquidate and take care of that, you'll need some from other people, no matter how you structure the ownership.

This is what I would have liked to tell Bronzeage before he deemed my macroeconomic knowledge as null - a truly terrible attitude on the internet in general.

It would be a privatized non-profit organization subsidized by at least a few nations. These nations might take a similar approach as ESA but with more of a privatized component like NASA.

It would be an emerging market when proposals are selected and bidding starts for contracts.

The whole thing won't be as profit based as it would be passion based - never underestimate the value of passions and visions.

 

[Bronzeage]

You bring up a lot of shit you don't seem to understand, or your understanding is skewed to the rest of the world.
On the subject of why people would contribute to you spaceship, you declare that it's a non-profit, not a charity. Why the hell does that make a difference? People still need to pay for your spaceship. You need resources to build it. Unless you own enough to liquidate and take care of that, you'll need some from other people, no matter how you structure the ownership.

This is what I would have liked to tell Bronzeage before he deemed my macroeconomic knowledge as null - a truly terrible attitude on the internet in general.

It would be a privatized non-profit organization subsidized by at least a few nations. These nations might take a similar approach as ESA but with more of a privatized component like NASA.

It would be an emerging market when proposals are selected and bidding starts for contracts.

The whole thing won't be as profit based as it would be passion based - never underestimate the value of passions and visions.

Now, you plan to monetize passion. I stand by my statement.

 

[Testy Calibrate]

http://techcrunch.com/2014/11/27/lunar-mission-one-kickstarter/

 

[ryan]

This is what I would have liked to tell Bronzeage before he deemed my macroeconomic knowledge as null - a truly terrible attitude on the internet in general.

It would be a privatized non-profit organization subsidized by at least a few nations. These nations might take a similar approach as ESA but with more of a privatized component like NASA.

It would be an emerging market when proposals are selected and bidding starts for contracts.

The whole thing won't be as profit based as it would be passion based - never underestimate the value of passions and visions.

Now, you plan to monetize passion. I stand by my statement.

I know you're smarter than that, because it's not money that drives business, as Apple (with Jobs), Google, NASA, etc. has shown; it's art, originality, ideas, evolution, revolution, etc. Business and sales is about relationships, raising interest, creating passion, etc. Passion is of the greatest value, and the money is the greatest value to the simpleton. How can you be so simple, uncultured and typical; I don't believe you are, but that's the way you are coming off with these posts.

Religion, politics, the Renaissance, Nationalism (like Zionism), art, fellowship are examples of people doing things not for money but for humankind, love, experience, intellect, etc. You are being such a shallow thinker in this discussion. The greatest business minds in the world say that their money comes from passion. Do you think Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Obama, famous artists, Mark Zuckerberg, Al Gore (resurgence from An Inconvenient Truth) and others got to where they are because of money, no! Passion is more powerful than money; money is a result of passions.

Every typical person doesn't do anything great because they don't see an end resulting in glory and money. They wait for something easy to come along; and for most it never will.

You can't expect to find something that is just going to make a ton of money. Unless you are lucky, you can't because someone would have found it.

If you are passionate about something, chances are people will at least like it. There are not too many things that someone shares a great passion for with nobody.

 

[bilby]

Now, you plan to monetize passion. I stand by my statement.

I know you're smarter than that, because it's not money that drives business, as Apple (with Jobs), Google, NASA, etc. has shown; it's art, originality, ideas, evolution, revolution, etc. Business and sales is about relationships, raising interest, creating passion, etc. Passion is of the greatest value, and the money is the greatest value to the simpleton. How can you be so simple, uncultured and typical; I don't believe you are, but that's the way you are coming off with these posts.

Religion, politics, the Renaissance, Nationalism (like Zionism), art, fellowship are examples of people doing things not for money but for humankind, love, experience, intellect, etc. You are being such a shallow thinker in this discussion. The greatest business minds in the world say that their money comes from passion. Do you think Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Obama, famous artists, Mark Zuckerberg, Al Gore (resurgence from An Inconvenient Truth) and others got to where they are because of money, no! Passion is more powerful than money; money is a result of passions.

Every typical person doesn't do anything great because they don't see an end resulting in glory and money. They wait for something easy to come along; and for most it never will.

You can't expect to find something that is just going to make a ton of money. Unless you are lucky, you can't because someone would have found it.

If you are passionate about something, chances are people will at least like it. There are not too many things that someone shares a great passion for with nobody.

Although you do seem to be striving to be the exception that proves the rule

 

[ryan]

I know you're smarter than that, because it's not money that drives business, as Apple (with Jobs), Google, NASA, etc. has shown; it's art, originality, ideas, evolution, revolution, etc. Business and sales is about relationships, raising interest, creating passion, etc. Passion is of the greatest value, and the money is the greatest value to the simpleton. How can you be so simple, uncultured and typical; I don't believe you are, but that's the way you are coming off with these posts.

Religion, politics, the Renaissance, Nationalism (like Zionism), art, fellowship are examples of people doing things not for money but for humankind, love, experience, intellect, etc. You are being such a shallow thinker in this discussion. The greatest business minds in the world say that their money comes from passion. Do you think Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Obama, famous artists, Mark Zuckerberg, Al Gore (resurgence from An Inconvenient Truth) and others got to where they are because of money, no! Passion is more powerful than money; money is a result of passions.

Every typical person doesn't do anything great because they don't see an end resulting in glory and money. They wait for something easy to come along; and for most it never will.

You can't expect to find something that is just going to make a ton of money. Unless you are lucky, you can't because someone would have found it.

If you are passionate about something, chances are people will at least like it. There are not too many things that someone shares a great passion for with nobody.

Although you do seem to be striving to be the exception that proves the rule

I guess only a very small percent of people will really understand what I'm saying here. If it was widely accepted, then I would start to worry.

 

[Uwe]

I'll be 65 in 25 years and I dream of moving into a retirement community on the moon someday. How do we make that happen?

 

[ryan]

I'll be 65 in 25 years and I dream of moving into a retirement community on the moon someday. How do we make that happen?

I am planning on finding volunteers from the best marketing and business programs in the world that will work with volunteers from the best sociological and engineering programs in the world. The goal is to come up with something for the general public to want and believe can work.
But this will take more that just leadership and money; it will take raising interest, awareness, and most importantly clear, logical, and creative sociological and technological plans.

We have the technology and the ability to construct a new society; we just have to be extremely creative if we want a plan that will work.

We have to get in the heads of the general public, wealthy, influential (entertainers like movie producers, singers, actors) and leaders (heads of states, law makers, elected officials etc.) and demonstrate that this will happen with enough support. It will be a promise for a better future for everyone.

Two very big reasons why I want this to happen so much is so we can ease population and geopolitical pressures.

In my opinion, we need this to work if we want to extend our lifespans and avoid the future conflicts that geopolitics will feed indefinitely.

I used to think that money is reason for all wars, but I know now that it's geopolitics.

 

[Mageth]

I guess only a very small percent of people will really understand what I'm saying here. If it was widely accepted, then I would start to worry.

Why would you start to worry if your ideas were widely accepted?

 

[Mageth]

I am planning on finding volunteers from the best marketing and business programs in the world that will work with volunteers from the best sociological and engineering programs in the world. The goal is to come up with something for the general public to want and believe can work.

But if you did, and they did, then you'd "start to worry" ???

But this will take more that just leadership and money; it will take raising interest, awareness, and most importantly clear, logical, and creative sociological and technological plans.

We have the technology and the ability to construct a new society; we just have to be extremely creative if we want a plan that will work.

We have to show and get in the heads of the general public, wealthy, influential (entertainers like movie producers, singers, actors) and leaders (heads of states, law makers, elected officials etc.) that this will happen with enough support. It will be a promise for a better future for everyone.

One very big reason why I want this to happen so much is so we can ease population and geopolitical pressures.

In my opinion, we need this to at least start if we want to extend our lifespans and avoid the future conflicts that geopolitics will feed indefinitely.

I used to think that money is reason for all wars, but I know now that it's geopolitics.

A song just for you, ryan..."I've got a plan!"

 

[bilby]

I'll be 65 in 25 years and I dream of moving into a retirement community on the moon someday. How do we make that happen?

I am planning on finding volunteers from the best marketing and business programs in the world that will work with volunteers from the best sociological and engineering programs in the world. The goal is to come up with something for the general public to want and believe can work.
But this will take more that just leadership and money; it will take raising interest, awareness, and most importantly clear, logical, and creative sociological and technological plans.

We have the technology and the ability to construct a new society; we just have to be extremely creative if we want a plan that will work.

We have to show and get in the heads of the general public, wealthy, influential (entertainers like movie producers, singers, actors) and leaders (heads of states, law makers, elected officials etc.) that this will happen with enough support.

You needn't be the best sociologist or marketer in the world to know that this is completely wrong.

If you want "the heads of the general public, wealthy, influential (entertainers like movie producers, singers, actors) and leaders (heads of states, law makers, elected officials etc.)" to buy in, merely showing that "it will happen with enough support" is going to be a complete flop; You need rather to show what's in it for them.

Why do I, as a wealthy and influential politician, want this to happen? Certainly not just because lots of other people think it's a swell idea.

It will be a promise for a better future for everyone.

I am a wealthy and influential politician. Me and mine already have a bright future; why would I put that at any kind of risk for the sake of a bunch of strangers?

One very big reason why I want this to happen so much is so we can ease population and geopolitical pressures.

Then you are clearly incompetent at basic mathematics.

Population pressures can be resolved by reducing birth rates; but they cannot be resolved by migrating to the stars.

Imagine a population that doubles every 30 years (This is pretty much what we had before the invention of the contraceptive pill). Now, let's pick a carrying capacity for the Earth - say it is 10 billion (it doesn't really matter what numbers you pick; the result is essentially the same for any carrying capacity and doubling rate, only the time-scales vary).

Now, in 1987, there were 5 billion people in the world. So in 2017, with 30-year doubling, the carrying capacity is reached. Now we need to move people off-planet. So lets terraform Venus - it's the same size as Earth, give or take; let's go the full Ryan on this, and assume that we can complete the whole job in a year, including building a fleet of spaceships to take people to Venus as colonists, and making Venus so liveable that it can independently support ten billion people. Problem solved!

Oh, hang on; fast forward to 2047, and - oh, shit. We have filled up Venus, and now we need to terraform Mars. Mars is smaller than Earth and Venus, but let's not be negative nellies; let's assume that we can make Mars fit for another 10 billion people to live. That solves Earth's problem. Oh, but we need to solve the Venus population problem too. Shit. Better terraform Mercury then. Another 10 billion on Mercury. Phew. Problem solved.

But wait! In 2077, we need to find four more planets to each take 10 billion people...

It is pretty obvious that moving people into space just doesn't solve the problem - within two centuries (180 years, if we want to be pedantic), you need to find homes for 320 billion people off-world; and thirty years later, for 640 billion. Even if we used all the matter in the solar system to build spacecraft capable of travelling at a sizable fraction of the speed of light, and we could terraform (or turn into hyper-drive spacecraft) every star and planet we found, we would run out of living space in a few centuries at best.

Nope, if you want to solve the population problem, you have to solve it at the source - either people have to die as fast as they are being born; or they need to be born only as fast as they die off.

Fortunately, with access to the contraceptive pill and basic primary education, women on average choose to have less than 2 children each. So the problem is simply that of getting them access to basic education and cheap, safe medication. No space program required.

In my opinion, we need this to at least start if we want to extend our lifespans and avoid the future conflicts that geopolitics will feed indefinitely.

I used to think that money is reason for all wars, but I know now that it's geopolitics.

Well going into space will just make the problem astropolitics. It won't actually solve anything at all.

 

[fromderinside]

Paraphrasing the actor playing the deputy administrator of EPA: "It would have worked if we started 20 years ago, but, now we're doomed."

Unless we find earth's warp drive it's over.

 

[ryan]

I guess only a very small percent of people will really understand what I'm saying here. If it was widely accepted, then I would start to worry.

Why would you start to worry if your ideas were widely accepted?

Because, then I wouldn't know why this idea hasn't materialized yet.

 

[Mageth]

Why would you start to worry if your ideas were widely accepted?

Because, then I wouldn't know why this idea hasn't materialized yet.

Well, do you know why this idea hasn't materialized yet?

 

[bilby]

Paraphrasing the actor playing the deputy administrator of EPA: "It would have worked if we started 20 years ago, but, now we're doomed."

Unless we find earth's warp drive it's over.

Well, we started in the mid-1960s with the whole contraceptive pill thing, so he is probably right - it will work, because we started 50 years ago, and it took 30 years to even begin to have an impact.

Notice that in 1987, the prediction was to have 10 billion people by 2017; but now the 2017 projection is about 8 billion.

The brick wall is looming, but we can see that we have at least started to put our foot on the brake pedal. Now we just have to persuade the Roman Catholics and the Muslims not to stamp on the gas.