pull down to refresh
101 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 1 Nov \ parent \ on: In search of clicks mostly_harmless
Maybe this one. All I know for sure is that I watched it, though.
None of them really go deep on the approach I'm most interested in, which is basically seeding the most habitable areas with the organisms most likely to survive them and letting nature take its course from there with relatively few other interventions.
Something about spreading life to other worlds really speaks to me, even though I think it makes little sense to spread people to other worlds.
Why don't you think it makes sense to eventually spread people to other worlds?
reply
It might eventually make sense, but not until we're fantastically wealthier.
I don't think colonization makes sense in the near-term because the most inhospitable parts of the Earth are still almost infinitely more hospitable than anywhere else we know of.
There's also no reason to send significant numbers of people to the places that are economically relevant.
Long-term, though, there are amazingly cool ideas for how to build transorbital habitats that could comfortably carry enormous numbers of people between worlds and lots of ways to comfortably settle any world.
There's a YouTube account called Arthur Isaac that covers a bunch of these. His voice is pretty distracting, though.
reply
I think there's gonna be people volunteering to colonize even if it's a net resource loss. Exploration and doing cool shit could be seen as a consumption good
reply
I agree, but I think we're a ways away from it right now. We'll probably see people trying to really colonize Antarctica and the Oceans first.
reply