[ExI] No Moon Bases Needed

[Eugen Leitl]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 08:24:08PM -0400, Kevin G Haskell wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:31:50 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 04:50:50PM -0400, Kevin Haskell wrote:
> 
> (Why would we need moon bases if we hope to evolve, soon?  Who would pay
> for)
> 
> >Evolving is hard work, and takes a lot of resources. Might be not
> so soon as many think.
> 
> Evolving is hard work, but it is happening faster and faster already, and

People are exactly the same as 50 kiloyears ago.

> the heavy resources should be invested in something that is realistic at

The US troop tent air conditioning budget is bigger than NASA.
The wars are at 4 terabucks already and counting.

There is heavy resource spending allright, and it's all poppycock.

> this point.  The greatest resource is the human mind, soon to be the
> Transhuman mind, and if the Transhumans find a need to go the moon, then
> they will do so much more quickly and efficiently.

You've fallen prey to the Singularity cult. Our 'friends from the future'
are out worst enemies, because the make us sit there in langurous apathy.

Don't ask what the future can do for you, ask what you can do for the
future. Orelse there won't be any future for you. 
 
> > (such an expensive venture?  I think we should be focusing on spending
> >our)
> 
> >How else are you supposed to get the energy and resources, given
> >http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-07-18/galactic-scale-energy<http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-07-18/galactic-scale-energy>
> >?
> 
> There are so many things with the article in this link that I can't even
> begin dissecting it.  While not just extrapolate the numbers that humans

You're not supposed to dissect it but to look at the numbers and realize
we're running out of time.

> will use in the next million years?  How about throwing out any assumption

Don't worry your pretty little head about the next megayear, rather think
about the next century. 

> of technological advances, or that population is expected to become stable

You haven't read the article. Technology can't create something from nothing.

> in less then 50 years to between 9 and 10 billion people? These numbers
> provided in the article are absurd.

The numbers aren't absurd (up to where they start exceeding the speed of light).
It's just a Kardashev roadmap.
 
> > (resources on bettering humanity through Transhumanism and working toward
> the)
> 
> >You see many resources spent on transhumanism?
> 
> Increasingly, yes, and I wish to see that trend continue at an every

Garcon, I'd like to have whatever he's having. It's heady stuff.

> quickening pace.  I more Capitalistic system would do wonders.

Capitalistic system. Yes, I'm sure it's all what it takes. 
 
> > (Singularity.  Wasting money on moon bases would only divert trillions of
> > dollars from money that should be otherwise be directed at something
> > productive for the human race.)
> 
> >MWh feed, clothe and house people. With real information ecology,
> >MHw will directly power people.
> 
> MWh is? I think I get the gist, and have to say, the only way we hope to
> feed, clothe, and house people, is through continued freeing of state-run
> nations to market-based ones, as we have been seeing happen world-wide. Good
> intentions aren't enough, nor realistic.  Well-reasoned self-interested is
> the most empathetic people can be by providing the wealth needed to produce
> the goods and services need for all people.

Less dogma, more traction.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE