Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | svaigsq's commentslogin

Stap this nonsense. It is clear that there is overpopulation on this planet, where most of the population want to consume all available resources to them, but there must be easier ways to deal with that problem... CO2 is food for plants. If you take away CO2 out of atmosphere of Earth, it is end of life for oxygen breathing life - Earth is inhabited not only by intelligent morons. Rise of temperature on Earth is not caused by CO2(which is generated also by volcanoes), that is generated by humans, but by behavior of Sun. Winter around poles is caused by inclination of Earth - not because there is abundance of CO2... oh, I must have mixed something up, because when I started to read sci-fi, it was all about next Ice Age on Earth. And that we are doomed and that everyone will die. And we need to get to different planet. Despite that there are no habitable planets in reasonable distance. With no breathable air or water. And if there were, then we would be kicked out, if we tried to land. Because that is not how things works - if you have habitable planet, you should care about it.

There is no H on Venus surface, so it is impossible to change Venus with local resources. So, they have to be imported - and there is H in comets. So, the only way to teraform Venus is with bombarding it with thousands of comets and space junk, that contains ice. Maybe getting H out of gas planets might be another source, too.


There are billions of comets available https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuiper_belt

Then there is also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oort_cloud

Don't worry - there is more than enough comets to bomb the Mars with all the future settlements. Muhaha


Good to know ... otherwise a possible future would involve hunting and waging war for the few ice comets ..


It is probably a typo, but Mars doesn't have enough atmosphere to corrode things more than on Earth.

If you need 50km long dredge, then it is a viable project in future, just like now it is with space elevator. Apparently that type of dredge will be needed to extract materials from gas planets(and 50km might not be enough), so that dredge will have to be developed anyway.

The most logical solution to make habitable world would be to bombard Venus with comets and small planets. They all have enough materials to stabilize Venus atmosphere and teraform it and also calculated bombarding can cause Venus to change axis and rotation.


This is very far-future stuff though. In contrast, we can colonize Mars and Titan with today's level of technology (Mars more easily more likely, because it's closer).


If Mars has atmosphere, then Moon has equally useless atmosphere, too. Despite differences in day length, Moon can gather more solar power, than Mars and energy is everything. Besides, those sattellites are gonna crash.


I don't think your atmosphere comparison is valid. The moon has absolutely no atmosphere. Mars' is 1% of earth. That's still a lot of _something_. aerobraking, and easy access to unlimited CO2 is incredibly valuable. Delta-v to mars is less than the moon so the extra solar panels required is not that big of an issue. The moon will probably only be a research outpost because of its gravity and slow rotation. Mars on the other hand will most likely transition to nuclear eventually to sustain a city/colony and industry


Ackshully Mars' atmosphere is famous for being rubbish for aerobraking but enough to burn you up.


Venus has 80% of Earth mass. Mars has 10% of Earth Mass. The simple math suggests, that these planets are destined to be combined in some distant future, but not by current civilization, so there is no real reasons to be concerned about anything at all.

Any of those projects of colonization in space is even greater waste of resources, compared to colonies in northern Canada, Antarctica, artificial islands or underwater cities.


I think you underestimate how radically different a world we'd live in if we had and inter solar system logistics network between colonies, earth and asteroids. It would be like another industrial revolution with untold and unimaginable changes. Likely with artificial islands, underwater cities, climate change reversal existing as mere side effects.


The article gives very clear idea, that "non-functional DNA" can become very functional after transposons spring into action(at birth, during illness, whatever the trigger), so writing it off as something that can be spring cleaned is too early.

As for clean house - what exactly is template here? Some humans have genes, that others don't have - DNA is not something, that has all the attributes of all humans with true/false values attached to them. Some humans have slanted eyes and have genes that are responsible for that look and others don't have such genes when they have no such feature and there are other genes responsible for their look. And this looks a sh!t job to sort out all "functional" genes of every human, as DNA of them is not going to be the same.

Editing out nonfunctional DNA looks like one of those ideas from 60s, when it was in fashion to remove appendix and make smaller stomach and they in the end paid with shorter lifespan.


There are even more questions if all of those 1000 PhD students receive pay(not the money they receive to support their research, which is not the same thing) from UC. But I assume that is not the case, that ALL PhD students are employed by UC... or is it? And why only 54 of those students feel that they are special?

I am confused and a bit curious, because that is not why I went to uni(not in US) and not how I had to deal with my studies. Also - can a foreign student apply for this free cheese and is UC diploma any good(also - outside UC, to have a real job)? And how UC is getting money? Any tax money involved(if that is the case, then why?) or only donations - from former students, who... work at UC?


Oh, come on... maybe get some interest in history and dig through at least some of the things that you are touching.

Paper is written in 1944. None of that was true for that time and does not apply to modern days at all. It seems to be influenced by pre-war mystical New Ageish movements in Europe, that claimed many things... like, that Europeans came from Tibet...

I'm really confused about definitions here. What we define as Western, Chinese, Indian civilization and what we define as civilization at all.

You can like it or hate it, but modern Chinese nowadays belong to Western civilization - they use Western inventions(and they still steal them - no offense, but I think, it is a right thing to do for them to get into better economical position and you should do the same) - phones, computers, mechanisms, medicine, sanitation, building, use western clothing and even Mao spread western ideas... At this point Chinese civilization as such certainly does not exist and it is a myth. Same applies to others.

Let's clarify some things about Western civilization: Western civilization does not apply exclusively to Western Europe. Roman Empire, that was melting pot of nations and cultures was spread in northern Africa and for most of what is considered world of Islam. Not bothering with colonies, core lands of ancient Greeks were in what is now called west of modern Turkey. Most of the world still does not know about great Chinese works, but they too don't predate works of ancient Greeks(as they were written more recently). There certainly existed even more ancient literature works in ancient China, but so did in civilization, what we consider western.

What you are talking about continuity of Chinese applies the same to Europeans as well, as they stem from steppe people, that were initially located in Eastern Europe and they even more efficiently than Chinese replaced local population. Heck, those steppe people even invaded civilization of Indus valley, eventually destroying it and replacing male population for most of northern India. Talk about continuity of ancient India - did you meant Tamil people or Harappans? Because if Harappans(Indus valley civilization) is considered Indian, then Tamil ancestors are thought to come from somewhere west of India and are not really native to India... unlike Veddas in Sri Lanka or Sentinelese of Andaman islands.

Now some nitpicks: Goths did not left any traces of Gothic civilization in Italy - besides, how do you even dear to consider Goths not belonging to Roman Empire, as they were employed by Romans! As far as I know, Goths did not invade only Italy, but also invaded Spain and settled in most fertile part of Roman Empire - Africa, so they walked over whole Roman Empire. There was no specific civilization of Britain during Saxon invasions. What did they even replace? And how do you differ them from Normans, Angles or even earlier Viking invasions? For all I know - all of them might belong to the same culture. Because of Spanish conquest, Americas are now considered part of Western civilization. Aztecs came from deserts of modern USA and were rulers over natives, so what's your point? And even then Aztecs were not unique civilization, but only part of civilization region of what we call Mesoamerica. Isn't is a hypocrisy to consider multiple states of China, that fought among themselves as continuous civilization(even today there are 2 Chinese states)... while looking on different European countries, who share the same civilization not consider them as continuous...


Here is the Wikipedia definition

> A civilization or civilisation (see English spelling differences) is any complex society characterized by urban development, social stratification imposed by a cultural elite, symbolic systems of communication (for example, writing systems), and a perceived separation from and domination over the natural environment.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization

In my college ancient history class I learned civilization was any group comprising the following:

* Fixed and defined geographical boundaries

* A systematically developed art/culture

* A government, even something as primitive as despotism

* A developed institution of one or more religions and/or science


I can read wiki, but the source of 1944 article is hardly wiki material, as there is no mention of similar ideas about ancient China. If you scroll that wiki link you posted, then you can find this link with dates for civilizations: http://www.ancienthistorylists.com/ancient-civilizations/10-...

What's the use of learned knowledge, if it can't be used for practical purposes? Your definition of civilization is enough to ponder what makes civilization now:

one internet for communication, K-POP, impossibility to do isolated science, global corporations with factories in China, that will suffer shortages because of Coronavirus, that can be spread by connecting airlines. Suddenly Chinese eating habits is concern for the rest of the world.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: