/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3569901

>eh, I think it has to be a lot easier to just improve the accuracy and dexterity of your robots.

You're still working towards emulating the dexterity of a human being. Why not use a human being?

Robots aren't used wherever it's possible to use a human. See this guy? He's a saturation diver doing some welding on an oil rig. They don't use a robot for this because a human is cheaper and better at it. The reason they do mining with robots isn't because they're better, it's because humans can't survive the depths necessary. Change that, and suddenly you can make a better business case for using humans.

>Plus, safety is srs business as you are aware. I doubt the area of properly deep human habitation is going to see much interest

No, most people interested in living underwater will do so in shallow water communities. But that's not what we're discussing. We're not talking about where people will live, but rather where they will work. And I think if it's possible to adapt humans to the necessary depths, we will one day see commercial divers mining hydrothermal vents at 3,000 feet or more. If sealions can withstand the pressure at over a mile deep, there's real potential for engineering human beings who can perform useful labor with greater dexterity than a robot and at a lower price at depths currently thought to be unsurvivable without some kind of rigid 1atm exoskeleton.

Most oil rig welding jobs, for instance, take place well within the daylight zone. I'd assume a professional saturation diver would know this.