Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday November 26 2018, @10:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the don't-forget-to-say-goodbye dept.

Elon Musk Says There's a '70 Percent' Chance He'll Move to Mars:

Elon Musk has talked about personally heading to Mars before, but how likely is he to make the trip, really? Well, he just put a number on it. In an interview for the Axios on HBO documentary series, Musk said there was a "70 percent" chance he'll go to Mars. There have been a "recent number of breakthroughs" that have made it possible, he said. And as he hinted before, it'd likely be a one-way trip -- he expects to "move there."

The executive also rejected the idea that traveling to Mars could be an "escape hatch for the rich" in its current form. He noted that an ad for going to Mars would be "like Shackleton's ad for going to the Antarctic," which (though likely not real) made clear how dangerous and the South Pole journey was. Even if you make it to Mars, you'll spend all your time building the base and struggling to survive harsh conditions, Musk said. And while it might be possible to come back, it's far from guaranteed. As with climbing Everest, Musk believes it's all about the "challenge."

The interview is available on YouTube.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:12AM (12 children)

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:12AM (#766715)

    Villages don't work like that.

    If Elon manages to get (say) 500 people to Mars, and they manage to set up some sort of workable living conditions they will be in effect a village.

    If Elon turns out to not be capable of running the joint, he won't be running the joint.

    If he won't give up power voluntarily the rest of the people will just ignore him and go about their lives. I don't think violence will be needed.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by edIII on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:34AM (2 children)

    by edIII (791) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:34AM (#766726)

    Until, like TMB pointed out, the rich people stop sending supplies. I'm pretty sure when ol' Elon is controlling the access codes to the oxygen tanks, and communication channels to/from Earth, that the village may decide it is best to do what he says. You mention that violence won't be needed, but violence has always been needed to fend off oppressors. Not too many villages survive attempts to subjugate them, hence nations and armies are required.

    This isn't Earth either. That village will most likely be heavily dependent on Earth for a few generations at least. Until you have sizable underground populations, and local vs terrestrial source for air, water, and basic materials, you will require a good relationship with Earth. That really translates into how happy Elon Musk's board members and shareholders are.

    All of this assumes a privatized exploration of Mars. Why wouldn't the world governments simply take all that way from Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, the moment a viable human habitat was demonstrated?

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @01:10AM (1 child)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @01:10AM (#766733)

      I'm pretty sure when ol' Elon is controlling the access codes to the oxygen tanks, and communication channels to/from Earth...

      Who the hell would go under those conditions? You would need to be stupid.

      ...but violence has always been needed to fend off oppressors.

      On Earth. There is going to be no-one external to the settlement, so any oppressors are going to be internal, and it is not hard to make a tiny minority come to heal without actual violence.

      That village will most likely be heavily dependent on Earth for a few generations at least.

      Oh absolutely. And yes, they will need to make sure they continue to be supplied.

      Why wouldn't the world governments simply take all that way from Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos, the moment a viable human habitat was demonstrated?

      Good point. Why indeed?

      • (Score: 2) by pvanhoof on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:23PM

        by pvanhoof (4638) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:23PM (#766934) Homepage

        Who the hell would go under those conditions? You would need to be stupid.

        Lot's of people buy hard -and software from vendors and/or have accounts on Cloud services and/or social media firms that control pretty much their entire life. Lot's of people are stupid.

  • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by khallow on Tuesday November 27 2018, @02:11AM (8 children)

    by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 27 2018, @02:11AM (#766762) Journal
    It's worth looking at early European colonies in the New World. There was a lot of nasty conflicts and starvation. I give better odds that we could under the circumstances avoid a Roanoke or Jamestown (Roanoke [wikipedia.org] disappeared, probably due to some combination of starvation and American native and/or internal conflict, and Jamestown [wikipedia.org] almost did for the same reasons), but it's still a significant risk for any Martian settlement.
    • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @02:32AM (6 children)

      by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @02:32AM (#766770)

      It's worth looking at early European colonies in the New World.

      I don't see why it would be. That just seems like a very US-centric way of looking at the world.

      We are not going to dump some people on Mars, then not have any contact with them at all for 4 years are we? The locals are probably not going to murder them either.

      Of course there is a possibility of internal strife, but I don't see why everyone seems to think there will be violence.

      There are plenty of better ways to settle community differences.

      • (Score: 5, Informative) by edIII on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:10AM

        by edIII (791) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:10AM (#766784)

        There are plenty of better ways to settle community differences.

        Ahh, yes, because we perfected that on Earth right? All of the people came together and calmly explained to rich oligarchs that bought up the housing and increased prices by 400%, that they needed to stop, or the average people would be a in a lot of pain. Then they did stop, and the people rejoiced in their evolved and enlightened conflict resolution process. Then they started mining color crystals, riding unicorns, and firing Care-Bear-Stares at everyone within eyesight :)

        The people often settle differences through the act of protesting, or grinding the Elite's gravy train to such a halt, that the minimum was doled out to shut them back up. THAT was the evolved thing to do, peaceful protesting and shutting down the factory until the rich fuckers that owned it could be convinced to come closer to the living wage. AFAIK, community differences are NOT settled, but have become entrenched and endemic with no solution in sight. We're more divided than ever. Oddly enough, I think the Internet actually weakened our ability to organize. Things start out peaceful, but then the Elites bring the violence, and you are back at violence being the one true thing that brings changes. That is absolutely true. Read up on the history of Unions in the United States, and how corrupt Chicago police moonlighting as enforcers shot union members protesting in the back. Ohh, and the Coal Police [wikipedia.org] were a real thing. How do you settle community differences with the rich and Elite in your community, when they just send the Coal and Iron Police to kill you?

        I wish we lived in your world, but in this one words, ethics, morals, and integrity mean jack, diddly, and shit. The only thing that will stop the sociopaths in the Elites from abusing us is a rock at sufficient velocity to the cranium. Either that, or we abolish the NLRA, and enshrine very serious protections for protesting into the law. To the point, that law enforcement needs to step the fuck back, and have ZERO power to stop a protest. Even if it is crippling businesses. Give the power back to the dock workers to shut down the whole port, and declare some cargo "hot" and refuse to move it.

        All of this because some rich sociopaths object to paying living wages to people, preferring to keep them captured and indentured through debt, laws, or force. That's all union members ever asked for; Living Wages, reasonable job safety, and the 8-hour day. (The last of which mothers and children died for in the streets to get it for us).

        --
        Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:03AM (4 children)

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday November 27 2018, @07:03AM (#766844) Journal

        I don't see why it would be. That just seems like a very US-centric way of looking at the world.

        The New World is more than just the US. For example, Christopher Columbus founded a colony in the Caribbean that turned out to be a mess as well. And the Vikings had their own problems including failed settlements in Greenland and Nova Scotia, and some serious tribulations in Iceland.

        And funny how I can mention concrete historical examples, and yet, you "don't see why"?

        Of course there is a possibility of internal strife, but I don't see why everyone seems to think there will be violence.

        You're already answered why, because there is internal strife.

        There are plenty of better ways to settle community differences.

        And humans often don't employ those better ways.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Blymie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:30PM (3 children)

          by Blymie (4020) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:30PM (#766897)

          I think the real problem will be living space.

          If people can just leave, and form their own community? For example, if people could just go out into the wild and start their own farm? Things get much easier. It helps reduce friction, enables dissidents to leave for a 'new place' that's 'better', even if it's only in their mind.

          Another thing is, external strife. The more the environment is trying to kill you, the more closely a community will huddle and protect each others. Conversely, I think the less likely people are to tolerate slackers in such situations.

          It might be best to look at say... Canada, when it was first colonized. Not in cities, but in smaller communities.

          For example, I read a newspaper that every week places articles from their archives, going back 125+ years. You'll see that they were literally stranded, there was no rail here, and of course no motorized equipment, the snow was too high for horses to get through, and so you'd really only have snowshoes to get through to the next settlement.

          And 50+ miles of trek through the snow, back before antibiotics, with wolves, bobcats, coyotes, and other such .. and with NO way for ANYONE to ever ever rescue you? People obviously didn't like the idea.

          In these articles, they all seemed to have a local family doctor. And they stored up supplies for the entire winter. They were quite literally stuck in that village for 5+ months, and you could see the rejoice as they finally cleared the path to the next town in Spring. Many of those older articles talked about all the chocolate, and other such things they'd buy as the men finally cleared the road and were getting their horses ready for a trip to the 'big town'.

          What's my point in all this? Well, that little village surely handled things differently than other places during those cold spell. There was no rescue, there was no communication with the outside world, no way to call for help.

          Really, it's the closest to what being on Mars might be like -- that life 125+ years ago. No rescue. No external help. 100% internal reliance, etc.

          So this is what might be a good thing to look for.

          Another (sorry for being so verbose), is that NASA has 1/2 a century of picking people, psychologically, that are 'easy going', in that they are able to tolerate others amicably, don't tend to pester/annoy others.. and while they "get the job done", are low maintenance/high performance/high tolerance personalities.

          I suspect that any colony for Mars will be similarly picked and vetted. This isn't perfect of course, but is many, many times better than random chance.

          Point is.. research into these things, and using existing data (like NASA and other space agencies use and collect) can help dramatically for a new colony.

          • (Score: 2) by Blymie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:36PM (1 child)

            by Blymie (4020) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:36PM (#766901)

            Hmm... just to add here.

            On the whole "other village" thing, a lot of research can be put into 'vertical tech', as in.. technology that all stems from easily built components. There is this:

            https://www.opensourceecology.org/portfolio/tractor/ [opensourceecology.org]

            Part of the premise is this:

            "The current practical implementation of the GVCS is a life size LEGO set of powerful, self-replicating production tools for distributed production."

            Essentially, all of their open source machinery has a goal of all using interchangeable, easily manufactured parts. They share the same engines too, at least last time I looked in depth.

            My point here is that, if you can locate mineable materials, you're much of the way there. What Mars really needs, is to have:

            - raw materials on Mars
            - enough "stuff" to bootstrap local production
            - a core set of technology that is simple, enables survival, but requires as low tech as possible to build

            The tech can be worked out here.

            I'm not saying "this is simple", but what I am saying is "this is a solvable problem".

            And I think that with people going to the Moon, SOME of this might be a good beta test for the tech in question.

            Anyhow.....

            • (Score: 2) by Blymie on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:41PM

              by Blymie (4020) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @12:41PM (#766905)

              And I suspect a response to the above will be "But.. but... it's impossible to be non-dependant upon Earth!"

              Well, this obviously isn't true. But it is true in the short term.

              However? The goal here is to reduce that dependence to key things. For example, if you can mine local materials, you don't need to import circuit boards. Support beams and metal for structures. Parts for motors. On and on.

              If you can get 'required goods' down to tiny things, like sending high-end CPUs/RAM/chips and components, things like that? Then you take a small thing (a CPU) and can turn it into a big thing (a computer) with local materials.

              That's goal #1. Goal #2 is to make your own CPUs, which of course is easy to do...

              (You don't need the best of the best for CPUs/RAMs to start.)

          • (Score: 2) by pvanhoof on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:29PM

            by pvanhoof (4638) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:29PM (#766935) Homepage

            Another thing is, external strife. The more the environment is trying to kill you, the more closely a community will huddle and protect each others. Conversely, I think the less likely people are to tolerate slackers in such situations.

            It might be best to look at say... Canada, when it was first colonized. Not in cities, but in smaller communities.

            I once asked my PO when I was doing contract work at Nokia: why didn't Finland ever send astronauts to the ISS? His reply was that there's no sauna there. Duh. However. He also added that his country is very socialist because, basically, when in the winter it's minus 20 and you can't afford the heating cost: you are dead a few days later. So they need socialism to sustain their population, basically. That, and that this minus 20 is the reason for the sauna's: if everything is broken in your house, you can still spend the night in your sauna and survive.

            I guess it's similar to your Canada-example.

    • (Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:05PM

      by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us (6553) on Tuesday November 27 2018, @03:05PM (#766929) Journal

      So did Jonestown [wikipedia.org], though for a slightly different reason. Still, a single-person-in-control colony can face such things too.

      --
      This sig for rent.