cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124
I would suspect that these gentlemen are more likely to end up sipping Mai Thais on the beach in the seedier parts of southeast Asia than end up on Mars haha.
Maybe for the criminals, but I think the world will be shrinking in the future. Fewer places to hide and disappear.
Could you cobble up a few thousand disaffected but reasonably wealthy men if you tried hard enough? Eh, probably, but you'd have to be quite lax in terms of screening. I'm not sure Musk wants his colonies to have that particular make, but I suppose he's going to have to compromise somewhere.
Beyond a thousand participants its unlikely musk will be personally interviewing anyone for the project. To some extent I'm assuming organization success for him. That this project actually gets off the ground and there is a reproductive and successful group of humans on Mars. If it is successful at all, then at some point it will turn into something that not one single human can manage.
My contention is that the number of people who are driven enough to want to settle Mars at a quality of life reasonable in the next few decades of colonial tech are very few, at least if they're paying for the privilege. Larger if you pay them, but then the question arises, what are you paying them for? They're unlikely to be financial positive, but of course, we must account for the fact that the biggest backer here is distinctly uninterested in an ROI (my Twitter has been bombarded with people arguing that point, but it seems clear to me money is far from Musk's primary motivator for Mars).
I like your contentions. But you are stopping at a few thousand. And I don't think the OP is stopping at a few thousand. Break ten thousand and I feel that things change significantly. Above ten thousand you go from some chance of managed by a single person to zero chance.
I do believe Musk in what he says he wants. Which is a multi planet species. And I think he is working as hard as he can to get there. I do think there is a limitation of wealth and resources at our current level. Right now he can support a few people on mars. In a decade when he makes things cheaper it might be up to 100 people. In two decades when he continues making things cheaper and maybe grows his wealth a bunch its 1000 people.
I don't think this project can solely rely on Musk to break 10k people on Mars. And when that limitation strikes, I think the groups I have outlined are the colonists available.
Also @self_made_human - some more ellaboration on what I meant:
I was imagining white collar criminals, fraudsters, or illicit business men. They would have the cash, but be in danger of losing it if they remained on Earth. They'd be willing to tolerate the risks, and have specific reasons for getting off of Earth. The criminals.
There are people with engineering and technical talent that don't fit in well on Earth, I've worked with plenty of engineers like this. They might get it in their heads that being on a different planet would somehow change their social skills. The anti-social.
There are people that are for various reasons largely unattached. Maybe their families have died or they've cut each other off. They aren't interested or good at dating, so they avoid it. They can still work and make money, but without family or social connection they simple accrue the money without much way to spend it. The misfits.
There are people that dun goofed. Had a good family, and a great life, but they got caught cheating with their secretary. Now they are divorced, hated by their family, fired from their job, and generally a pariah to all their former friends. Maybe they embezzled from their business, did a brief stint in Jail, but the family and money are all gone. They went big and lost it all, but they still have a bit stashed away. The failures.
Agree with you on all points. But I'd also add that the original premise is probably wrong, I'm guessing the main selection effect for moving to Mars will be a willingness to leave Earth entirely behind.
The first few hundred or few thousand might be WHIMs, but the first million will merely be those who are willing to leave Earth behind. And the individual reasons why people are willing to do that won't always be good or even neutral. The anti-social, the misfits, the failures, and the criminals will all end up in the mix at some point.
I think both perspectives might be accurate. I lived in a conservative area and then a liberal area. The first was pretty pro-cop the second was not.
The cops coming from the pro cop area seemed universally better than the candidates coming from the anti cop area.
And talking to cops, they also tend to know who the shitbags on the force are.
"Keeping up with the zeitgeist"?
Political beliefs are a bit like this. So is sports team support.
Maybe it's Tribal affiliation, or "mood affiliation" as Tyler Cowen calls it.
I think your hypothetical made sense, and I understood what trade-offs you were trying to highlight. I also appreciate that you linked the actual original article.
The biggest problem with fighting crime isn't that prison sentences are too low, it's that the police and justice system - in large part due to progressive activists, but in even larger part due to general government stasis and lack of ambition - has gotten worse at policing. They should'v gotten better at policing at a pace matching the advance of technology! Crime could be so much lower than it is today with just a bit more proactive policing, use of computers, and shaping of culture.
I'm a little less sure on this. It seems some aspects of policing have gotten easier. Cameras and evidence are more ubiquitous, but not as much in high crime areas. Other aspects remain difficult or have gotten worse. Physically restraining an uncooperative human is just as difficult. Tasers have made this somewhat easier. New drugs have have made this harder. Seems easier for people that were likely to cooperate anyways, and harder for people that were unlikely to cooperate anyways. Courts have certainly gotten worse, due to wait times and case loads. I think technology has helped courts handle some of that (remote sessions). But they are still fundamentally limited in getting people to be physically available at a given time, shortly after a crime, and provide enough time for a judge and some lawyers to talk through the case.
I mainly don't think technology is doing much to help. Culture could probably help a bit. But mainly it would be more people involved. More active policing, a much larger court infrastructure to clear out the dockets way faster, and more monitoring or jailing of known past criminals. I just don't know if myself, or voters are really willing to pay the costs necessary for crime reduction. There are diminishing returns at some point.
That is the general approach I've had. Asteroids are somewhat great as a belt storage system. A metallic asteroid represents like 15-25 iron ore. Depending on where your productivity is at. So I like to keep the asteroid belt about 80% full at any given time.
But I'm just not sure if that works for shattered planet and outer system. I probably need to play around in the testing area for once. Even though I'm sorta loathe to do that, I'd rather just actively play and over engineer solutions.
Friday Factorio thread.
I haven't played as much in the past two days cuz of travel. But I'm on my way back to my computer and can't wait.
I feel like I found good ways to deal with gleba. And it just needs to be scaled up and improved upon. With a major injection of bioflux to the system. There should be enough bioflux to keep a constant export going to Nauvis where our science is being moved to take advantage of the more efficient biolabs.
I've also been trying to scale up Vulcanus quality item generation. I have maybe a few thousand active recyclers at any given time. Working on iron, steel, and copper.
Fulgora still oddly seems like the best place for getting legendary equipment. Even with my massive Vulcanus recycling operations. I finally saved up enough for a legendary mech suit. Now I just need to keep filling it with legendary equipment.
I'm coming to realize my space platform designs for the outer system are not working. They are too big, and not quality enough. It's hard and a little annoying to build rare or legendary quality ships, since I need to see which components are in stock on the nearby planet before building.
In addition to quality changes I might need to switch the general design philosophy. Most of the current designs pass necessary resources on belts that circle the entire space platform. I think this works alright on average but is bad during extended periods of active flight. It gets too clogged with asteroids from my grabbers, and ammo/rockets run low too fast if all of them are pulling from the same belt. I instead want to feed resources in and out of the central hub for the front of the ship, and then do a circular belt for the other sides. The central hub will store up extra ammo, and if it starts running low use interrupts to stop the ship and let it build a reserve back up.
There are detailed and specific rules. Their way around it usually involves assembling a kit of stuff made in other countries.
Generally, yes. There are areas where America does do well enough at physical manufacturing to be an exporter. Weapons, medical devices, cars, planes, etc.
I have the belief that there is a limited amount of ambition and engineering expertise per capita that ultimately caps the technology level. I think a bunch of industrial tech levels have only been maintained by the ascendancy of China. No ambition or real engineering talent has been directed towards building ships in the US since the 1940s.
Are you sure this apartment is going to have people your age? It seems like a crapshoot whether those people will be any good.
I'd focus effort on joining some activities like kickball where you can meet and hangout with people your age, and just be willing to invite them over and host at your place.
On cabinet picks. I have a conception of what a cabinet should be for Trump, and his picks don't surprise me because they line up with that conception, even if I don't have the specifics and the details down. I keep seeing news stories or people posting here that think he has cabinet picks that don't make sense, but some of those specific cabinet picks make the most sense to me.
My conception of Trump is that he picks opinionated and individually competent people to head up things. He wants them to have opinions that may not be the same as his. If they work for him and with him he will support them in their goals at a higher level. If they work against him or his directives he will fire them. How the people under him get along with each other is largely inconsequential to Trump.
Trump does not have strong ideological beliefs, but he does have strong social beliefs. By social beliefs I mean he finds friends, allies, employees, bosses, enemies, etc to be very important distinctions. He plays Tit For Tat strategy almost religiously. He would never put a political/social non-ally in his cabinet. But he doesn't care too much if you conform on some ideological spectrum. Trump is after all a bog-standard democrat from the 90's, and he just won as a republican presidential candidate.
Contrast this with Obama who was willing to make ideological or party based cabinet nominations like Hillary Clinton, even though she was absolutely not an ally of his. Or Joe Biden who picked Kamala as his VP even though I don't think anyone has ever claimed they are allies or friends.
I think you can see Trump's cabinet picks best by looking at his history with John Bolton, who was his National Security Advisor, and was ultimately fired by Trump. Bolton has been on a tour lately saying that Trump's cabinet picks can be summed up as requiring "fealty" to Trump. I think Bolton is a dirtbag, but he is correct here. But it shows a reason to like Trump, not dislike him. The president is the elected position. He is temporary King. Cabinet people are meant to serve the King and enact his will. If they don't they can be fired and replaced. No one ever elected John Bolton to National Security Adviser. Its a little crazy that Bolton thinks its ok to be picked for a specific cabinet position to advise the president, and then the correct course of action is to betray that person and work against them.
Ya have a bunch of setups like this on aquilo, and now maybe starting to do them on gleba
Artillery is highly effective for medium and small demolishers. When I tried to kill a large one with artillery I got my position overrun. That health Regen is insane. I think the big ones need quality nukes.
Vulcanus will always be somewhat limited with launch capacity. The gravity is higher on the planet, so more rocket parts are needed (4x if I remember right). Then two of the launch components require oil products, which you have to get through coal liquefaction. And you'll be amazed at how much coal you can go through for liquefaction.
We managed to get to the victory screen this week. It came sooner than expected. We were sort of expecting to unlock some new secret technologies instead of the victory screen. We still have yet to do anything with promethean science packs.
I think in order to really do end game stuff I'm going to need to need to focus heavily on quality builds for a new ship. Or retrofit my existing massive ship. The sheer volume of asteroids in the outer system was overwhelming a blue belts ability to transport missiles. The flat front of the ship also had some vulnerability to asteroids clipping the sides.
But in order for the sheer quantity of stuff I'd want for quality builds, I'm gonna need to clear up more of the production on other planets.
Including plastic on Gleba, which is becoming a real limiter in getting enough quality red circuits. @No_one was brave in being the one to start our Gleba builds. But I think I need to make some of my own attempts, because I've seen the Gleba builds clogg up enough, and I have my own ideas about how to build a Gleba mega factory and it's different than his approach.
I think I want to build self contained mini factories. They take in the raw inputs, make their own necessary intermediate products and output final products. The benefit of this approach over sharing around intermediate products is that the intermediates tend to spoil the fastest of everything, and they tend to require the most in terms of bulk, so they fill up belts and then quickly spoil on those belts. The other benefit of this approach is I can just shut the whole mini factory down if there is enough end product on the logistics network. Rather than sending in a constant set of inputs that proceed to spoil and clogg up once the end storage or spoilage handlers are full.
It can be done on the phone if a sit down is not possible. I'd push for the sit down if you can. It's going to be uncomfortable and one easy way to get out of an uncomfortable conversation on the phone is to end the conversation. But getting out of one in person is harder.
The sooner it happens the better. Especially if a week or two has already passed.
That is interesting, I didn't know there was a term for what I had. I've done Keto diets before, but didn't have much effect. I think I just have a slightly longer circadian rythym. I've managed to not let it effect work, but it definitely got worse over covid when I was at home and able to easily nap.
Hey guys, what's your experience with chronic sleep deprivation?
I think I never slept normally. So my whole life? I seem to have a circadian rhythm that just pushes me an hour later every night no matter what. If I wake up consistently at the same time every day I will just feel permanently deprived of one hour of sleep, and I will consistently stay up an hour later than I should.
If my sleep schedule is totally unmoored from a specific wake up time it will just drift forward again and again. It will do this until I'm napping through the day and staying awake all night (like I am right now).
I need about 5-6 hours of sleep sober and about 8-10 if I'm drinking. Good sleep is something I highly value. I've occasionally taken medicine to fall asleep (nyquil, melatonin?/melanin?), but it seems to lose effectiveness, and I've avoided the addictive habit forming stuff.
This is a problem with all life. Government is worse at this.
You still need to think about your marginal impact of getting involved. If I can do nothing about a problem whether I get involved or not then it makes no sense to worry about it.
Obviously I only know what you have presented, but I can imagine a scenario where it is still possible to resurrect the relationship. In this scenario she preemptively broke up with you, because she thought you would do it instead of a long distance relationship. Or that you'd cheat on her in the long distance relationship. If she has a past personal experience with it, or close friends it has happened to this is almost certainly on her mind. If you didn't fight her much in the moment on the no-LDR thing, you probably came across as agreeing.
If you think this is the case, then this might be the path to fixing things. You'd need to have a sit down talk with her, and you'd have to put yourself out there:
- Say that being around her and not having a relationship hurts. Ask for a serious sit down talk.
- Say that you love her and want to stay with her even in a long distance relationship.
- Offer to travel to help the long distance relationship. Or think about taking a vacation there in the middle of her away time.
You will come across as desperate, and that is fine. It is ok to be desperate around a woman who knows and loves you, especially if that desperation is for her. You need to create the reassurance in her mind that you won't hurt her, and that the only one doing the hurting is her to you and herself.
If she does take you back, know that the relationship will start to feel different. This is not a bad thing. You were in a honeymoon phase of love. Its a time mother nature gives people to make sure they are fucking a bunch and having a kid to tie them together. But the next phase to make it work together is partnership. You need to be a team together. People do this by moving in together, getting a pet together, working on a project together. My wife and I sort of started at this phase because we met at work and already know how to work as a team together. But you two already have a project ahead of you that you can work on: keeping the love and affection alive during a long distance relationship.
I will again repeat that I don't know everything about your situation and my read on it may be totally off. I do think that your assumption that she found another guy is almost certainly wrong. If she is the cold-hearted bitch that would have strung you along like that and seemed so loving, then she wouldn't have broken up with you. She would have just proceeded to cheat on you and not have a bit of guilt about it. My experience and the experience's I've seen other people have with psycho types is that they tend to not try for true breakups with people. Because relationships are one-way streets with them. They are not held back by the terms of the relationship, only their non-psycho partners are held back. I do remember a case somewhat similar to yours where the psycho boyfriend moved away for a three month gig, and did not inform his girlfriend till the day he was leaving. And then immediately went on to cheat in the other city while claiming to do a faithful LDR.
Dig up your old feelings of love for this woman. There is a decent to good chance that she made a decision in fear and uncertainty and with a desire to avoid being hurt. It might be a decision that she regrets. If you still want to have a relationship with her there is probably a path to that working out. If you want things to be over and done with, commit to that path and fully block her.
Resurrecting an old discussion?
I think I said all that is necessary at the time.
- Prev
- Next
As it is this isn't enough for a top level post.
Some more context and your own opinion would improve the post.
More options
Context Copy link