/sci/ - Science & Math

never

There isn't one. There's no plan to, yet. We're still talking about our first manned mission there, and even that date has a few decade range of uncertainty.

>>3005783
new topic:

Whats the date for the singularity?

I heard its soon

I don't think it is a good thing we colonize planets, because if we exploit them just like earth for their minerals there will eventually be a shift in gravity and that could affect us in a bad way.

>>3005812

>>3005818

How much mining and transfer of mass between do you think we would need to have a statistically significant effect on the orbital path of either Mars, the Earth, or their moons? Besides, the mass of all the planets change over time due to space dust and things like that. The earth gains 100 tons each year, which isn't much, bit still worth considering over the scale of geological time.

The again, atrophysics isn't my field of expertise, but I have a hard time seeing how we'd perform a change in mass that's more statistically significant than that in any reasonable time frame.

>>3005818
And let the trolling begin.

>>3005783
about 800 years

>>3005834
Where is this comic from?

>>3005834

Why do people keep posting that? The Singularity doesn't require us all to be equal or for the world to be a nice place. Inequalities exist, that has nothing to do with the development of technology.

It's also an insult towards people who genuinely believe that technology is the path towards a better life for everyone. Just because basic functions of economics, like the time it takes for costs to reduce, mean that the third world will take a while to see the benefits does not dispute the idea.

It's like saying that, because evolution predicts genetic disorders, it can't be true since that's unfair.

>>3005818

No-one in their right mind would exploit planets to send resources to Earth.

Asteroids, on the other hand....

>>3005847
The comic is expressing that most singularity-faggots are so self-indulging they would rather faun over the idea that they can be immortalized and cheat death rather than hope the world could put its efforts into developing a reliable food and clean water source for the world and allow everyone to live in a safe and comfortable environment.

Don't blame the fallacies of capitalism or modern day economics for your lack of empathy for less fortunate people.

>>3005876
>implying anyone gives a shit about people beneath them
this is something common to EVERY SINGLE PERSON. if anything business people are worse since they're actively exploiting those poorer than themselves.

>>3005876
>>3005897
it's a fact of human nature that you can only process about 150 people as actual people. monkeysphere and all that

that's why a million deaths is a statistic and one is a tradegy.

>>3005876

Right, forgive my strawmaning, but isn't that like saying we shouldn't be excited over a cure for cancer or treatment for AIDS because kids in Africa still starve? Disregarding for a moment that a Singularity Event that works out in humanity's favour would be able to solve such problems, saying that we can't talk about, or get excited over, some potential future development because of some other worldly concern is stupid.

Stop acting like a prat just because you find the idea unthinkable.

>>3005897
>>3005899
That's true that we don't genuinely feel a tremendous amount of sorrow for immense losses and picture/videos of disasters, disease, famine, death, war, etc. do not instill any strong emotions. However, what makes you a decent person is UNDERSTANDING that this is wrong. I watched thousands of those starving children digging through trash ads and simply flipped to another channel as an immediate solution, but when I actually experienced less fortunate people not as inferior but most of the time just having a few bad decisions ruin their life when I started volunteering at a soup kitchen, it made me look at the world in a completely different way.

>>3005946
I'm pretty sure those kids digging through trash didn't make any shitty decisions that made their life crap but I get your point.

What was this thread about again, Mars?

>>3005955

Martian colonization. I'm expecting that pretty soon, myself; we've got a company that wants to start it (SpaceX), and NASA is talking of building gas stations in Earth orbit.

It'll be some time around 2020-2025, if all goes to schedule. Which it won't, most likely. Better range is probably 2024-2028.

I don't think it will be within our lifetime assuming we don't have this whole singularity thing like 80 years max.

I do think though that we will start to see the colonization of the moon at some point, if not I'll be mad disappointed at the earth.

>>3005876
So he should instead blame it on the people developing new, helpful technologies. You know, the way you and that comic do? GTFO luddite, isn't it immoral of you to wear synthetic fibre and use a computer?

>>3006015
Logical fallacies fucking everywhere.