Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dento 1258 days ago
Colonizing Mars is going to be easier than solving tragedy of the commons.
4 comments

It seems easier because Mars proponents often focus on the technological challenges (which are indeed great, if not insurmountable), while ignoring the human challenges. The challenges from human nature are going to exist on Mars just as much as they do on Earth; things like warfare don't suddenly stop existing just by shifting people to Mars. People act like Mars would be a place to keep people safe from nuclear war, but destroying a Mars colony from Earth is trivial compared to creating one.

If one looks at the history of colonies (attempts to colonize the new world, for instance), we see that they often fall apart socially even in situations where they're in a place with much more resources than they had back home. Humans aren't dwarf fortress type automatons that can simply be handed whatever necessary job is needed and mindlessly go about their day for the rest of their lives.

No one has been able to manufacture a functioning mini-society, and every attempt has ended in spectacular failure. It seems crazy to think things will suddenly work if we drop the people in a place devoid of almost all resources and entirely hostile to life from Earth.

Maybe the group will actually work together if the other option is certain death? :-)
How can you bring humans to Mars without also bringing human nature, i.e., human flaws? We'll wreck Mars quicker than Earth, because Mars is already a wreck.
Wouldn't it be more practical to do the "spreading to other worlds" thing at the same time as "fixing human nature"?

We don't know if human nature can be "fixed" (in a positive way), so stopping other things until that's been done sounds a bit silly to me.

It's not a question of starting or stopping; whether we start or stop seems irrelevant to me. The point is that humanity has been "coddled" by the Earth, because we were born and evolved here, but we won't be coddled by Mars, and thus the Mars project is doomed to failure, since we're already failing on Earth, in a vastly more favorable environment.

What's the point of a "backup plan" when the primary plan isn't even working?

> What's the point of a "backup plan" when the primary plan isn't even working?

The whole point of a having a backup plan is for when the primary plan isn't working :S

> The whole point of a having a backup plan is for when the primary plan isn't working

c/when/if

When your primary plan isn't working, you fix that first. Ideally, the backup plan is never needed.

If your house is on fire, you don't start building a second house, you put out the damn fire.

Also, it would be pretty dumb to put a backup in place more dangerous than the original. It would be like building your second home inside a volcano.

You can't wreck a wreck. Mars can only be improved by humans.
This is why I always wait for red wine to dry before cleaning it off my carpet.
Don't underestimate human ingenuity in wrecking shit. ;-)
Humans will still be the ones colonizing Mars, the same humans who would theoretically make Earth uninhabitable. If we humans can't stop destroying Earth, we have no chance in making a Mars colony successful.
You forgot the /s