• keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Seeing such a post upvoted on solarpunk gives me hope.

    I don’t think the space race and space habitat is the way forward, but there is a future timeline that is sustainable and technologically advanced.

    I am happy that some people still believe in it.

          • NightFantom@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 hours ago

            It’s in the DLC, but frankly it wasn’t that good imo. The base game was easily top 10 games I ever played, the DLC I didn’t even finish.

            • I always meant to buy the dlc. Was wondering how they would even incorporate new stuff as the original is just one long puzzle. Good to know i didn’t miss much. Maybe I’ll catch it on good deal one day. I did very much enjoy the base game. That ending lives rent free in my head. Falling through the nothing was a tripp.

              • WuxinGoat@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                16 hours ago

                Personally i really enjoyed the outer wilds DLC and would really recommend it, yea it’s not quite as good as the base game but it’s like a self contained puzzle world that is still clearly made in the same style as the base game and if you want more of that type of puzzling you can’t really go wrong with it imho.

  • naught101@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 hours ago

    It’s cool, but it would never look like that.

    Maybe more valuable in the way it shows what we think the ideal situation on earth would look like…

    • tomiant@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Hahaha right? It’d be a few highrise metropolitan buildings and then mostly low income slum and there’d be thousands of cars and no parking spots.

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 hours ago

        In a space station I think it’d basically be all high-density pods with a few small shared green spaces for mental health…

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Even for earth this is way too suburban imo. Does not make sense to have everyone spread out that way for multiple reasons.

      Solarpunk development in my view should be as green as our suburbs today but much denser to save on cost, keep people connected, and save room for wild nature.

      • keepthepace@tarte.nuage-libre.fr
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Well, if you assume that the air recycling will be done by plants, you are going to have a need for a huge biosphere and probably for a lot of oceanic biome. If you plan on having an agriculture, if you plan on having pollinating insects, you are going to need a huge biomass.

        You’re going to have far more nature than you will have humans.

        This setting usually assumes that you have a fast transport network built in the core infrastructure. So being spread out is less of a problem, especially if you have free electricity through solar panel. That means that moving stuff around on electric motor is going to be basically free.

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Agree, for sure. Still, the dream of chill accessible green space is real and should not be ignored. I think low-medium rise, high density with lots of interspersed green spaces is the optimal for cities. I think it can be done such that most land is much greener and more connected than modern suburbs.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Yeah I think we are largely advocating for the same thing. Central business districts that are all concrete and glass are pretty dystopian. But medium dense cities with car infrastructure replaced by green space would be perfect.

      • tomiant@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 hours ago

        It makes a lot of sense in the “Elysium” sense. A rich resort getaway.

        It wouldnt be all blue and nice sky either, because no atmosphere. Unless they tinted the glass blue I guess but even then you would either have a permanent night or permanent full on solar hyper radiation. Like how would lighting that even work?

        You’d clearly have a roof/floor all over, and it would all be artificial light.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          21 hours ago

          I mean, that make sense as a fantasy, but even quadrillionaires would struggle to make it happen, given the constraints of physics, I suspect…

  • Rhaedas@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I still think O’Neill was probably right, we could do this if we decided we needed or wanted to bad enough. There’s issues to figure out, but that’s just science. I got hooked on the idea of space colonization when as a kid in the 70s reading an article in a National Geographic issue exploring the idea, using a fictional opener of someone writing back home about living on one. They used some of Davis’ works there.

    • tomiant@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      100%.

      The one thing global society lacks is direction. Shit even my dad told me that my whole life.

      We’re like, let’s all compete about money and random great things will or might happen as a by-product.

      Bitch we need to figure out what we want to do and do that, not just wing it and hope for the best.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I think the issue for space colonization is there’s no real practical reason to do it beyond that it’s cool and interesting. There’s still absolutely tons of largely unused land in deserts, polar climates, and even the ocean that are far more accessible and habitable than space is.

      • tomiant@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Cool and interesting seems like two amazing reasons to do it.

        I hate that we live under a mental paradigm that the only thing that matters is efficiency, ad infinitum and ad nauseam.

        Shit, the nazis were super efficient, doesn’t mean they had a good thing going.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Due to low gravity and few pathogens, it might be something people will do for retirement. You can probably expand the time of healthy active years well into your 80/90ties that way.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          22 hours ago

          Maybe… or would your body simply rot away faster since you aren’t using it as much? I would be inclined to think the latter.

          • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            21 hours ago

            I suspect they’d need to do some power lifting to avoid accelerated osteoporosis in the lower gravity, as the bones need to be put under strain and shock to stay healthy.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Depends on how active you are and how low the gravity is. A lower gravity like on Mars would be probably be more helpful than harmful for elderly people.

    • sudo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Even with the technological issues of space colonization solved, how long before the unsolved social issues cause it to come crashing down?

      • tomiant@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        21 hours ago

        If we could agree on such a great project and make it happen, that would have a massive benefit for our overcoming the very problem you are talking about.

        If we could just agree to do something great together then that in itself would solve a lot of social ills.

        Cooperation, not competition. That is the key.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        23 hours ago

        Given the way society is currently set up, if we pursue space colonization then it’ll become a luxury for billionaires to escape an unlivable planet. Worse, the hoards of the capital will have even less desires to fix things.

        (This is not some doomer or accelerationist take, just hating on billionaires.)

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I don’t remember the image having a name, but it’s from Gerard Oneill’s book The High Frontier, Human Colonies in Space. - see OP’s link.

          • perestroika@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 hours ago

            The neat thing about them:

            First, the pair of habitats can be rolled by operating the cylinders as momentum wheels. If one habitat’s rotation is slightly off, the two cylinders will rotate about each other. Once the plane formed by the two axes of rotation is perpendicular in the roll axis to the orbit, then the pair of cylinders can be yawed to aim at the Sun by exerting a force between the two sunward bearings. Pushing the cylinders away from each other will cause both cylinders to gyroscopically precess, and the system will yaw in one direction, while pushing them towards each other will cause yaw in the other direction. The counter-rotating habitats have no net gyroscopic effect, and so this slight precession can continue throughout the habitat’s orbit, keeping it aimed at the Sun. This is a novel application of control moment gyroscopes.

            From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O'Neill_cylinder