• @Allonzee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Whenever I dare to hope about the lofty, admirable star trek future, I remember that space is completely unforgiving and we just aren’t up to the task for anything more than a token selfie by the best dozen humans we can possibly produce with great effort and training.

    As a species, we aren’t going to spread out there. Still too primitive, and probably too self-destructive to make it out of this phase of evolution. This might be one of those great filters scientists postulate as to why there aren’t signals from innumerable civilizations out there.

    We aren’t even capable of caring for one another, let alone the EASIEST to maintain, most naturally human friendly habitat we would ever encounter in the cosmos as we evolved to fit it. No airlocks, the air/water/waste recycling was already fully automated, all we had to do was not recklessly grow/metastasize to the point we strain the absolutely massive system out of greed and glut, and stop carelessly shitting where we sleep. We all know how that’s been going since we figured out how to make dead animal poison rocket us accross town.

    Master space? Master planetary defense? We can’t even defend this world from our own habitual consumerism. We’ll be lucky if we aren’t scattered tribes living near the old hardened structures of the before times for emergency shelter from the new normal weather events in a hundred years. We’re already starting to argue over the resources it’s taking to rebuild population centers from the current new normal. We have played pretend we were since human civilization began, but we are NOT and never have been this world’s owners or masters, and we are still very much its subject.

    And Reminder, what we’re doing and have been doing in decades won’t be undone for millions of years. The Earth is a self-correcting system, and the damage we’re doing is inconsequential to its 3.8 billion year old, beautiful story of life growing out of every crevice, just not on a timescale humans can benefit from or even truly appreciate.

    Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell - Great Filter

    • Snot Flickerman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      15
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      We aren’t even capable of caring for one another

      It’s the part that drives me the most wild. We’re all stuck on this shitty rock hurtling through space together, literally the bare minimum we could do to make it bearable is to be kind to one another and supportive of one another. We can’t even be fucked with bare minimum.

      • @Allonzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        711 months ago

        Same, if we can’t even, in actions not rhetoric, start from a baseline of “we’re all in the same boat, we all have needs and seek happiness, how do we maximize everyone’s well-being to facilitate that?” then we’re still just savage animals wrestling in the dirt, but with the dangerous capacity to devise technologies for selfish ends we aren’t wise/evolved enough to truly appreciate the consequences of using.

    • @cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1211 months ago

      Tbf, in order for humanity to get where they’re at in the Star Trek timeline they had to go through WWIII: Nuclear edition

      • @Allonzee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1511 months ago

        Covid kind of disillusioned me to the whole “all humanity needs is a common enemy/suffering to get right” concept.

        • @cm0002@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1111 months ago

          Iirc, it wasn’t just that as far as Star Trek goes. Iirc, most world governments and economic systems were destroyed, humanity was a mere fraction of its peak population. Humanity literally physically came together because it was necessary to rebuild.

          Its one thing to have a common enemy/suffering without changing anything else as far as governments and social systems goes. It’s completely different when you not only have the enemy/suffering but to also need to literally rebuild everything from scratch

            • @rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              011 months ago

              That’s just not true. WWI had a definitive winner in Europe, but not in the Middle-East. And Turks are still killing people unpunished. And Germany wasn’t a definitive loser, despite Entente countries making it really feel that role.

          • @grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Humanity literally physically came together because it was necessary to rebuild.

            I’m pretty sure that didn’t really happen until after the Vulcans showed up, TBH.

            From Memory Alpha:

            During the 2060s, Cochrane and his team of engineers began developing the warp drive. (Star Trek: First Contact) The challenge of inventing warp theory took Cochrane an extremely long time. (ENT: “Anomaly (ENT)”) In 2061, he was responsible for Earth’s first successful demonstration of light speed propulsion, though his work was far from complete. (VOY: “Friendship One”; ENT: “In a Mirror, Darkly, Part II” library computer file) His primary motivation for commencing warp technology was financial gain in the devastated, poverty-stricken America that existed in the wake of the Third World War.

            He finally built Earth’s first warp ship, the Phoenix, in the hope its success would prove profitable and allow him to retire to a tropical island filled with naked women. A historical irony was that, contrary to the fact he went on to use the Phoenix to inaugurate an era of peace, Cochrane incorporated a weapon of mass destruction into its design; he constructed the Phoenix in a silo on a missile complex and used a Titan II missile as his launch vehicle.

            (WWIII ended in 2053; First Contact was on 5 April 2063)

            • @cm0002@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              111 months ago

              Ah yea it looks like I was forgetting large parts, either way I think it still reinforces my main point, we will probably go through a lot more pain and suffering before we can even come close to Star Treks timeline

    • @grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      711 months ago

      I remember that space is completely unforgiving and we just aren’t up to the task for anything more than a token selfie

      “Wow, rude!” – Carl Sagan, probably

    • @deadcream@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      411 months ago

      I remember that space is completely unforgiving and we just aren’t up to the task for anything more than a token selfie by the best dozen humans we can possibly produce with great effort and training.

      Astronauts aren’t superhumans and there is nothing “special” about their training. They are just pilots with stricter physical requirements. The reason why there aren’t many of them is because there is no need for more. Our technology is not there yet for cheap and “boring” space travel beyond low Earth orbit (and probably won’t be for a century at least). And there isn’t anything worthwhile for humanity out there anyway. At least at the current stage in our “evolution”. So for now manned spaceflight programmes are just vanity projects funded by politicians (for “national pride” or whatever) or some billionaire celebrities like Musk.

      Also I don’t think that world peace would be necessary for space colonization. It could be born out of conflict or for economic reasons, like colonization of Americas. It’s simply that it will take centuries for us to reach a point when the prospect of leaving Earth will become attractive for regular people (if we survive that much of course).

    • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      As a species, we aren’t going to spread out there.

      Well not with that attitude!

      Yeah, space is hard and yeah mistakes have been made along the way. But things are definitely changing. Reusable rockets are nearly here… Between spaceX, rocket lab and stoke aerospace, there is real potential for these rockets to work. Hell, SpaceX has already conducted a successful orbital test flight.

      With reusable rockets we’ll start to see a drastic reduction in the cost to get to orbit, probably by two orders of magnitude, but possibly even more. With the cost down people will reassess the value of space and the resources available there. In other words, people will start doing more in space, and getting more from space. Resource collection, refining and specialized manufacturing are three most likely industries to start expanding into space. Once there is work to be done there it will begin to make sense for people to live there.

      As a species, we aren’t going to spread out there.

      Not today, no. But within my lifetime, I expect we will. Remember, change is usually slow and this would constitute the most profound change in human history.

    • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months ago

      We aren’t even capable of caring for one another, let alone the EASIEST to maintain, most naturally human friendly habitat we would ever encounter in the cosmos as we evolved to fit it.

      I would argue that having 8 billion people in the same place makes earth the hardest place to live in some ways.

      One of the options that space habitats would allow for is smaller communities. What if you lived in a space station with roughly the population of a city? Your community wouldn’t necessarily need to be affiliated with other communities to make up a “country”, but it could be. Your community would have that option. And if the community is not geographically connected to the other members of its nation, there’s no reason they couldn’t change their mind, join a different country if you’re views seem better aligned. For the first time humans would have opt-in governance.

      Would opt-in governance lead to a more stable society? Would not being stuck geographically near communities with opposing views lead to less violent aggression? I don’t know, but I hope so.

    • @rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months ago

      While everything living grows old and dies, and has its limits, we separate “<T> revolution” from “<T> normal development” for a reason.

      I mean, what currently exists (with consumerism, incredibly wasteful production of electronic devices doing mostly useless work, less efficient production and organization being preferable when it allows someone to preserve power, Ponzi schemes of various kinds, ignorance and tribalism) is sometimes just a culture, not basic instincts (which have their downsides, but those are solvable). It’s not all cultures.

      That culture has brought us revolutions unseen before. Then it stagnated and may die, but the humanity may survive and have more revolutions in the future.

  • @Leg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5311 months ago

    Real talk, an asteroid wiping us out would only expedite the inevitable. If we could pull together and deflect an asteroid, there’s hope. If not, we failed the test and die with the consequences. But we don’t need the asteroid to fail this test. We’re making great strides towards destroying our home with home field advantage.

      • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I don’t think we ruin everything… We’re also the best around at improving things, certainly improving our environments.

        I know it’s easy to be pessimistic about these things, but humans are evolutionary badasses. We’re capable of amazing things. I wouldn’t count us out just yet.

        Besides we haven’t really ruined anything. We haven’t done any damage to the earth that won’t heal eventually. The earth has seen many heating and cooling cycles and plenty of mass extinctions before and it will again (with or without humans).

  • @mriormro@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4411 months ago

    We’ve already solved this. We just need to train a team of dysfunctional oil drillers to send up to the asteroid.

    • @Jackhammer_Joe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2411 months ago

      It was a great movie - sadly, because it was so accurate. Provided that you can call a sci-fi movie accurate. But after the pandemic and shit, “don’t look up” looks like a playbook for a meteor extinction level event

      • @bionicjoey@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1911 months ago

        What’s funny is that movie released during the pandemic, so it seemed like that was the thing it was commenting on, but actually it was filmed before the pandemic and was originally meant as a commentary on climate change. What it shows is that humanity’s modern tribalism is remarkably predictable. No matter what the problem, we will turn it into an us versus them situation where getting anything meaningful done becomes an uphill battle.

      • @MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Actually they say that Comet Dibiasky is twice the size of the dinosaur killer, but they also say it’s 6-1 9 kilometres wide. 10 kilometres is the size of Chicxulub. Scientifically it was very inaccurate. But politically it’s flawless.

    • @flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      311 months ago

      That’s the last three words of the article. The author didn’t miss the connection either.

      I always wonder when people repeat something from the article or ask a question that’s answered in the article: did you not read it or did you just want to start a discussion about this connection and are somehow constrained in the number of words you can write per day?

      • @MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        I didn’t read it. The Register has a drier tone than I felt like reading today. I mean seriously, putting the word tabletop in quotes? I am NOT the target audience for that writing style.

  • @rsuri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    3711 months ago

    “Sustaining the space mission, disaster preparedness, and communications efforts across a 14-year timeline would be challenging due to budget cycles, changes in political leadership, personnel, and ever-changing world events,” the report says.

    First administration: “We must do something about the asteroid. I’ve started a plan to divert it, but it’ll take several years.”

    Second administration: “The asteroid is a corrupt globalist conspiracy. We never needed to divert asteroids in the past, why do we supposedly need to spend all your hard-earned tax dollars on this all of a sudden? I will prove my anti-elitist attitudes by cancelling the asteroid program as soon as I take office.”

    Third administration: “Yes we recognize that the asteroid is a threat, but as we saw last time there’s just too much political resistance to solving it. Let’s focus on other priorities that we can solve.”

  • @MonkderDritte@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    36
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    We are not at a point where the “global community” is more than a few competing, egoistic and greedy tribes with clashing world views, so that’s no surprise.

    • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 months ago

      Yeah, I think that really it wouldn’t be the “global community” that ends up saving the world in an asteroid impact scenario.

      It would likely be an organization that could operate on its own without endless committees. Say, the Chinese space agency, or SpaceX, or the Indian space agency. Someone would decide to just do it, without getting the whole world’s approval for the mission. Then the whole world would complain that the effort was made without any international cooperation or oversight. And the organization that literally saved the world would get chewed out by everyone because inevitably the plan will not have worked perfectly.

      But I’m not worried, because even billionaires don’t want to die. Someone would do something.

        • @Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          211 months ago

          I’d trust them to try to intercept an asteroid… It’ll be harmless when they miss and achieve nothing, but in the off chance that they pull it off, yeah sure Boeing, go for it.

  • Boozilla
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2911 months ago

    Achievement unlocked: discovering the Great Filter.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      811 months ago

      If an asteroid were to hit the Earth large enough to cause human extinction, it would save us the embarrassment of killing ourselves from poisoning the climate or microplastic pollution.

      I’m pretty sure we navigated nuclear holocaust, but we haven’t fully ruled it out either.

  • @Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1611 months ago

    That’s okay, humanity had s good run. I imagine we’ll have extinctified ourselves way before a space rock could do it. A+ for trying though.

  • @WatDabney@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    14
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    I’m roundaboutly reminded of one of my favorite novels - Greener Than You Think, by Ward Moore.

    It’s a science fiction story about the end of the world that was written in the late 40s. The proximate cause of the end is all of the landmasses of Earth being smothered by a gigantic and very aggressive strain of Bermuda grass, but the real cause is the utter and complete failure, due to ignorance, greed, selfishness, short-sightedness, incompetence, arrogance and so on, of every attempt to combat it.

  • @peanuts4life@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 months ago

    Call me an optimist, but I think that if an android was actually going to destroy life as we know it, nations would do everything in their power to advert the disaster.

  • @hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    611 months ago

    Half the population would believe the asteroid is a hoax spread by the [insert ethnic or religious group here].