Setting that aside, exploring space is not the same thing as building a company town for the world’s least mentally stable pregnancy fetishist oligarch in an unworldly cold desert where everyone is sure to die.
I would argue that the majority of sci-fi has predicted otherwise.
Yeah bud, there’s also these little shelters called caves.
The author of the article literally guffaws at the prospect of respinning a planet’s core when that’s not remotely how you would approach that problem.
It would be like writing an article saying “Come on, you believe in vaccines? What, you think a scientist can cut open your individual cells and put antibodies in each one? You really think they have tweezers that small? Get real dum dum.”
The scale of what you just described is really goofy.
The word you’re looking for is “big”. As in, it embiggens the noblest spirit.
I don’t think it’s feasible to protect a mars-diameter disc of massive magnets from damage by either normal objects traveling through the area or from some human engineered attack.
It’s also not possible to protect the ISS from either of those and yet it’s operated fine for 30 years. You do not need every little bit of it to be perfect, you just need to deflect enough solar wind that it allows Mars atmosphere to build back up which is what provides the real protection.
If you’re imagining the capacity to create such an emplacement, don’t you imagine that such phenomenal effort and wealth of resources would be better spent solving some terrestrial problem?
Like I said, we waste more resources than that all the time. I’d rather we didn’t build yachts and country clubs and private schools, yet we do. There’s no reason to not get started building that array, especially if it will take a while.
There’s a real difference between e-waste, which is mostly byproducts of the petroleum refining process with electronic components smeared liberally on, many of which rely on petroleum byproducts themselves and electromagnets, which are, at the scale you’re discussing, massive chunks of metals refined, shaped and organized into configurations that will create magnetic fields when dc is present.
That is not what e-waste is. E-waste primarily consists of silicon chips and the metal wires connecting them. Even the circuit boards themselves are primarily fibre glass, not petroleum.
And no, we wouldn’t be creating those using actual magnets, we’d be using electro magnets, which is just coils of wire connected to PV and logic chips.
I quite frankly flat out do not understand why people on the left are so against space exploration suddenly. You know that Elon Musk is not the only billionaire right? And you know virtually that all of them just sit on their wealth, and do nothing with it but wast on luxury lifestyles for themselves right? Yeah it would be better if billionaire’s did not exist, but as long as they do, why are you upset about their money going to space exploration as opposed to just yachts and $20,000 a night hotel stays?
No, not really. If we’re talking about colonizing a planet, building a bunch of magnets connected to solar panels is not going to be that big or expensive a part of it.
It’s also the kind of relatively cheap thing that takes a long time that we may as well get started now. I mean we churn out that much bullshit e-waste constantly for no reason, if we were more focused / more billionaire’s oney went to that, you might actually be able to get it done.
deleted by creator
The rub there is that it’s 1-2 Tesla’s over the whole cross sectional area of Mars (I believe).
It’s not that hard to make a 2 Tesla magnet, but the most powerful electromagnet we’ve ever made is only 45 Tesla’s and even that only produces a 2 Tesla strong field out to 2.8m. So you might be looking at a Mars diameter worth of small magnets.
Solar panels would be my guess, though you can always build a space based nuclear reactor if you can refuel it and get rid of its waste.
It would certainly need a lot more to figure out an actual feasible plan, but I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally impossible about doing it with today’s technology, let alone the future’s.
This is a pretty embarassing way to open this article:
Mars does not have a magnetosphere. Any discussion of humans ever settling the red planet can stop right there, but of course it never does. Do you have a low-cost plan for, uh, creating a gigantic active dynamo at Mars’s dead core? No? Well. It’s fine. I’m sure you have some other workable, sustainable plan for shielding live Mars inhabitants from deadly solar and cosmic radiation, forever. No? Huh. Well then let’s discuss something else equally realistic, like your plan to build a condo complex in Middle Earth.
NASA legitimately has a plan for this, and no it’s not crazy, and no it doesn’t involve restarting the core of a planet:
https://phys.org/news/2017-03-nasa-magnetic-shield-mars-atmosphere.html
You just put a giant magnet in space at Mars’ L1 Lagrange point (the orbital point that is stable between Mars and the sun), and then it will block the solar wind that strips Mars’ atmosphere.
Otherwise cosmic rays etc are blocked and interrupted by the atmosphere, not the magnetosphere.
The confident dismissiveness of the author’s tone on a subject that they are (clearly) not an expert in, let alone took the time to google, says all you really need to know about how much you should listen to them.
Yeah the writing in Starfield is pretty bad.
I think Skyrim’s was better because there was less central control. I know that stuff like the whole Werewolf quest was just made by a passionate designer and dev who made it after hours, but that during Starfield development a lot more got run up the chain and there was less individual freedom.
I suspect that stems from the massive procedural generativeness but am not sure.
Starfield’s biggest flaw was in trying to make a grand space game given that Bethesda’s strength is sandboxy, exploration focused, RPGs.
I am of the mind that exploration fundamentally does not work in a space game because the scale is too big. There’s waaaay too much space on even a single planet to populate with meaningfully interesting things to find. So there’s maybe one or two interesting handcrafted things per planet and you spend all your time in system and galactic scale maps to find them, rather than stumbling across them while out on a walk.
The only space games that work imho, are either ones with tiny planets like The Outer Wilds, or ones that are more linear and driven by very good writing and space is more of a backdrop than the actual millions of km you have to travel through and explore (like The Outer Worlds, or Mass Effect).
So I think Bethesda has a higher chance of success in literally any other, more limited, setting, given that writing isn’t their strong suit, but all that being said, I still don’t know if they’ll course correct.
Don’t worry guys the US has given Intel a bunch of money to create US based chip making facilities, I’m suuuuuure it’s being put to just as good of use and definitely isn’t being squandered away like Intel squandered away their years of market dominance.
Too bad. Valve’s not exactly known for making good games anymore, just for printing with money Steam.
This is a trash article.
Here’s the Reuters article: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/maersk-agrees-study-nuclear-powered-container-shipping-2024-08-15/
It makes it clear that Maersk has joined a study being lead by Lloyds Register and Core Power to assess the potential of using 4th generation nuclear reactors on cargo ships.
A couple of demonstration nuclear powered commercial ships have been built in the past (by the US, Japan, & Germany), but they’ve all been too expensive to operate commercially and have all been retired or converted to diesel, mostly due to being too complicated to maintain and repair, and too specialized to benefit from any economies of scale.
The US Navy and France both currently operate nuclear powered aircraft carriers, the US, UK, Russia, France, India, and China all operate nuclear powered submarines, and Russia has a bunch of different nuclear powered military ships and icebreakers so it’s not a radical concept, and I have no idea where the linked article is getting the “only 4 have ever been built” claim.
Lloyds Register has also been running these studies for years, the only real interesting tidbit here is that Maersk is interested and they’re big enough to move the needle singlehandedly, but again they’re just signing up to participate in an early high level assessment of the idea, the assessment could just say ‘nah, not worth it’ and this is just a non story.
Because I’ve never once tried to argue that anyone should use it.
I honestly cannot fathom how gamers don’t see how much Valve has fleeced them. Like you said, it’s literally just 400 tech workers who would have had $150-200k salaries get to win the lottery and get $300k-500k salaries, at the expense of every single other gamer who just wanted to play a game at the end of their shift.
Lmao, says the guy defending a multi billion dollar megacorp’s monopoly.
I prefer competition in all markets, if you prefer monopolies that take 18% more of every single sale, I have bad news for you about your level of grown up ness.
You shouldn’t.
Naive to think epic is offering a lower cut for altruistic reasons as opposed to it being the only method they could think of to try to convince devs to sell there.
This is literal the entire basis of our economy. A company being able to offer a service more efficiently charges less and gets more customers to come to them. It is the literal only mechanism in capitalist that keeps it running at all efficiently.
And that they wouldn’t jack up the rate once they corned the market given how their how strategy has been more reminiscent of Walmart approach of pricing lowering to gain market share. Biggest sign is that the store isn’t even profitable much like how lot of services these days aren’t profitable and burn money then jack up prices and offer less once they corner the market. Hell even Microsoft Store has offered low rates of 12% because few want to use it. Going to argue Microsoft is nice too now? Not falling for it Tim.
How would they corner the market? Steam still exists. As you pointed out, the Microsoft store still exists. If they ever jack up their prices devs can go elsewhere.
No one is accusing Epic or Microsoft of altruism, they offer 12% because that’s closer to what it actually costs them to run the store. Steam charges 30% because gamers refuse to buy games from anywhere else so they can just tack on an extra 18% more money that they’ll take.
How fucking naive are you? There’s no difference between the two because the later turns into the former every time. You’re just defending your favored party using shit tactics, which is why you can’t defend the opposite.
Lol no. It’s called competition. It’s the literal entire basis of how our economic system is supposed to work and remain balanced, and having two competitors inherently creates more competition than just one where their inherently is no competition.
If you have to use violence constantly to survive and thrive, violence is your only tool. Once the bully is defeated, the victim will begin bullying, continuing the cycle of violence. This is no different.
Now who’s naiive, you really think that every time someone has stood up for themselves that they’ve gone on to become a bully?
You’re talking about the people who lowered a car from a rocket crane onto the surface of another planet, you can be thoughtfully critical, but their technical record has earned them a lot more than surface level dismissal.