Putting aside any debates and arguments about the possibility of finding habitable planets, developing proper spacecraft, surviving the long voyage, etc, and so on...
Do you believe it is even possible to successfully create a colony somewhere in space? I have my doubts based on human nature and world history. Colonies just don't work out in the long run, at least for the founding country. Star Trek has always proclaimed the idea that expansion into space is what ultimately saves the Earth from itself. I have also read this in various other fiction novels.
I am coming to feel that a space colony would probably end up being the reason for the demise of the Earth ala "It's safer to Nuke them from orbit just to be sure" school of thought.
What do you think?
I find it difficult to speculate on something that, if it ever happens at all, won't happen for many hundreds of years. At the same time I also find it difficult to make a blanket statement such as "it would never work".
That's an interesting axiom, if I'm allowed to run a tangent before the thread has even begun catching speed.
"Colonies just don't work out" is a common statement, but it is so obviously wrong.
Every human habitat on Earth started out as a colony in some form or other.
That the image of success of a colony should hinge on the pecuniary profits of the originating social body seems to me utter balderdash.
Examples of colonies that have turned a profit for the enterprising citizens of the mother country in addition to said country itself should be relatively numerous, even if we discount colonies that were money sinks but later successful in their own right.
The question is in addition not "will we as a nation profit from it" but rather "will we as a species profit from it".
Actually, Slarg's got a point- it's less that colonies are doomed to failure than that they never remain simply colonies; they either become sovereignties or fail spectacularly.
I can't see why you would ever use meat puppets rather than robots.
They'd have to be self-sustainable and at a reasonable cost. Otherwise I can't see anything beyond scientific or military outposts being maintained.
Yes. They'd need to be economically viable at the very least. Something like an asteroid or offworld mining operation maybe. Or an orbital power generation station.
I would think that at some point in the future, probably a hundred years at the earliest but likely much longer than that, aside from a colony of some kind on the moon or Mars, that colonies further out would become objectives. At least for research at first, especially if less hostile environments are found. Obviously it depends on being able to travel outside our Solar system in reasonable time frames, and that's a big if. But even if space travel is quite lengthy, perhaps in a couple hundred years or more some people would volunteer to take on a very long journey anyways, to try a distant colony on a reasonably favorable planet.
I'd think a colony would have to seen as commercially profitable at some point, kind of similar to the reasons some of the colonies were started in N. America, Africa, etc. Or nations could pool finances and resources to set up a colony. As others say, I also agree that at some point a successful colony would desire to become independent.
Quote from: Strix on October 20, 2009, 11:29:02 AM
Do you believe it is even possible to successfully create a colony somewhere in space? I have my doubts based on human nature and world history. Colonies just don't work out in the long run, at least for the founding country. Star Trek has always proclaimed the idea that expansion into space is what ultimately saves the Earth from itself. I have also read this in various other fiction novels
1: Many colonies have been very very profitable for the founding country in history.
2: Colonies have certainly worked out well for those who founded them. Colonisation is one of the core things in human history.
3: Looking at the future from the perspective of historical analogy is a big mistake which should not be done. History does not repeat itself.
Quote from: Tyr on October 20, 2009, 12:18:09 PM
1: Many colonies have been very very profitable for the founding country in history.
2: Colonies have certainly worked out well for those who founded them. Colonisation is one of the core things in human history.
3: Looking at the future from the perspective of historical analogy is a big mistake which should not be done. History does not repeat itself.
1: Yes, for a time a colony can be very profitable. History seems to show, however, that the more profitable the colony than the faster it will seek independence.
2: I would disagree on this point. What colonies have worked out well for those who founded them? I also believe you are confusing immigration with colonization. Immigration is one of the core things in human history.
3: Of course history doesn't repeat itself. There are too many variables involved. I would say rather that certain themes and patterns of history tend to repeat themselves.
I assume that when you are discussing who "founded" them that you mean the parent country. If not than, yes, colonies have often worked out for the settlers.
The American colonies have certainly worked out well for the Brits, in both the short and long runs.
Other than the Space Chinks I don't really see anyone setting up colonies
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on October 20, 2009, 12:39:02 PM
the Space Chinks
That sounds like a good name for a band. :punk:
Quote from: Strix on October 20, 2009, 12:28:50 PM
1: Yes, for a time a colony can be very profitable. History seems to show, however, that the more profitable the colony than the faster it will seek independence.
2: I would disagree on this point. What colonies have worked out well for those who founded them? I also believe you are confusing immigration with colonization. Immigration is one of the core things in human history.
1: Which is a good thing. It removes all financial burden of the colony but still lets you trade with it (which is where the actual money is to be made). The US after independance was a lot more profitable for the UK than before.
2: Immigration is where people go to a already existing colony.
What colonies have worked out well for those who founded them? The US, Canada, England, Germany,
etc...
Edit
Quote
Assuming that when you are discussing who "founded" them that you mean the parent country. If not than, yes, colonies have often worked out for the settlers.
As said again the US.
Excluding Africa and those colonies which soon failed I struggle to think of many colonies which didn;t work out well for the home nation.
I think profitability could happen reasonably quickly, due to mineral wealth and the possibility of scientific testing. Just find a planet with a ton of valuable rocks (presumably not all THAT difficult), find some way to make it sustainable in terms of food (if you can travel across solar systems, presumably not that hard, as we'd have probably developed terraforming in our own system).
I think it is the inevitable future. Getting off this planet is more than an insurance against Earth-specifc catastrophe, it allows humans to continue having families even after our average lifespan is 100-1000 years, with most of that presumably being productive.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 12:49:01 PM
I think it is the inevitable future.
:huh: IMO the far more likely future is human extinction prior to interstellar colonization. It may be that we give way to machine life of our own creation, and that machine life in some way colonizes the galaxy, but obviously we wouldn't deserve much credit in that case.
Quote from: Caliga on October 20, 2009, 12:51:14 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 12:49:01 PM
I think it is the inevitable future.
:huh: IMO the far more likely future is human extinction prior to interstellar colonization. It may be that we give way to machine life of our own creation, and that machine life in some way colonizes the galaxy, but obviously we wouldn't deserve much credit in that case.
Machine life? How are we defining that? I think we've all seen The Terminator too many times for us to be so reckless with our AIs, and I'm not *totally* convinced that an AI without an instinct for self preservation or a thirst for power would want to get rid of us. I could see some kind of posthuman cyborg-like being in our future, but I think most of us like our bodies quite a bit.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 12:54:58 PM
Machine life? How are we defining that? I think we've all seen The Terminator too many times for us to be so reckless with our AIs, and I'm not *totally* convinced that an AI without an instinct for self preservation or a thirst for power would want to get rid of us. I could see some kind of posthuman cyborg-like being in our future, but I think most of us like our bodies quite a bit.
I think he was thinking more like the film AI- humans die out but the machines survive.
But yes, AIs are a good thing, its stupid robots we have to worry about.
:yes: I wasn't meaning to imply that some Matrix-style war between humanity and AI was necessarily inevitable.
I tend to think that progress like that is unlikely. We've come a long way from the hunter-gatherers, but we still have way more in common with Sumerian farmers than anything else, and I doubt that space exploration and the end of meaningful material want will change that.
In an odd sense, I could see the shock of AI development and meaningful space exploration resulting in some kind of cultural/behavioral reaction a la Dune, but to be honest I really just want to ride sandworms.
To be totally honest, I find the Dune scenario weirdly plausible in some ways. Space-travel would probably be so expensive that many communities would presumably find ways to set up a colony with the absolute minimum dependence on trans-galactic trade, with various minority groups founding their own colonies in various areas. Weirdly enough, I could see the Mormons doing something like that, and they did exactly that in Starship Troopers, where they were killed by Arachnids (yay!).
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 01:09:10 PM
but to be honest I really just want to ride sandworms.
gay.
Quote from: Strix on October 20, 2009, 12:28:50 PM
2: I would disagree on this point. What colonies have worked out well for those who founded them? I also believe you are confusing immigration with colonization. Immigration is one of the core things in human history.
Northern Italy, Sicily and Sardinia seem to be working for Italy.
Everything South of the Tagus for Portugal, plus the Azores and Madeira.
The area of Granada for Spain.
France has been very successful in colonizing Occitania, it even had most of the locals believing that their native tounge (the Llenguadoc) is a patois of French (which it is not).
Jämtland and Härjedalen for Sweden (central Scandinavia was settled in the XVIIth century)
Greenland for Danmark.
Russia is doing fine with Siberia.
The isle of Hokkaido for Japan.
Taiwan [colonized in the XVIIth century by the Chinese] and the lands of the Uighurs for China (and Tibet can be argued to be a sucessful colony, too).
India is doing fine with Goa.
Most of Thailand.
Turkey certainly proved to be a successful Turk colony (though it was never subject to their homeland).
Everything West of the original colonies for the US (most of the central and western US states were colonized, they did not just spontaneously sprout out of the ground and joined the US fully developed). Arizona and most areas taken from Mexico can also be said to have been colonized by the US. Hawaii also fits this bill.
That's what I remember, but I am sure there are many other examples.
As for space colonies: come on, does anyone doubt that if we find planets similar to Earth, that people would not want to live there eventually?
The only question is wheter it will all be under one govermnent or not. I suppose that will depend on the nature of Space Travel:
- If it is slow and communications hard, first colonial governments will basically be feudal and the planet will eventually turn independent.
- If Space/Time is mastered and we can move instantly between systems (or even between planets in different systems), then they would just be extensions of the mother planet.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2009, 12:05:14 PM
Yes. They'd need to be economically viable at the very least. Something like an asteroid or offworld mining operation maybe. Or an orbital power generation station.
Again, why do you need people there?
Quote from: Faeelin on October 20, 2009, 02:43:20 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2009, 12:05:14 PM
Yes. They'd need to be economically viable at the very least. Something like an asteroid or offworld mining operation maybe. Or an orbital power generation station.
Again, why do you need people there?
You might not. Does a settlement require human presence and not just robots to qualify as a colony?
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 01:18:05 PM
To be totally honest, I find the Dune scenario weirdly plausible in some ways. Space-travel would probably be so expensive that many communities would presumably find ways to set up a colony with the absolute minimum dependence on trans-galactic trade, with various minority groups founding their own colonies in various areas. Weirdly enough, I could see the Mormons doing something like that, and they did exactly that in Starship Troopers, where they were killed by Arachnids (yay!).
If space travel is so expensive that trade is not feasible, then neither is colonization.
As a minor digression, wasn't it odd in WALL*E that the evil corporation was responsible for everything bad but they *gave away* all their goods and services.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 20, 2009, 02:49:34 PM
As a minor digression, wasn't it odd in WALL*E that the evil corporation was responsible for everything bad but they *gave away* all their goods and services.
Nein. Hollywood hates capitalism, except when they grow rich from it, which is all the time. :)
Quote from: Martim Silva on October 20, 2009, 02:38:32 PM
As for space colonies: come on, does anyone doubt that if we find planets similar to Earth, that people would not want to live there eventually?
The only question is wheter it will all be under one govermnent or not. I suppose that will depend on the nature of Space Travel:
- If it is slow and communications hard, first colonial governments will basically be feudal and the planet will eventually turn independent.
- If Space/Time is mastered and we can move instantly between systems (or even between planets in different systems), then they would just be extensions of the mother planet.
People might want to live there (if they're retarded), but they'll never be able to do so.
Quote from: Martim Silva on October 20, 2009, 02:38:32 PM
Quote from: Strix on October 20, 2009, 12:28:50 PM
2: I would disagree on this point. What colonies have worked out well for those who founded them? I also believe you are confusing immigration with colonization. Immigration is one of the core things in human history.
Northern Italy, Sicily and Sardinia seem to be working for Italy.
Everything South of the Tagus for Portugal, plus the Azores and Madeira.
The area of Granada for Spain.
France has been very successful in colonizing Occitania, it even had most of the locals believing that their native tounge (the Llenguadoc) is a patois of French (which it is not).
Jämtland and Härjedalen for Sweden (central Scandinavia was settled in the XVIIth century)
Greenland for Danmark.
Russia is doing fine with Siberia.
The isle of Hokkaido for Japan.
Taiwan [colonized in the XVIIth century by the Chinese] and the lands of the Uighurs for China (and Tibet can be argued to be a sucessful colony, too).
India is doing fine with Goa.
Most of Thailand.
Turkey certainly proved to be a successful Turk colony (though it was never subject to their homeland).
Everything West of the original colonies for the US (most of the central and western US states were colonized, they did not just spontaneously sprout out of the ground and joined the US fully developed). Arizona and most areas taken from Mexico can also be said to have been colonized by the US. Hawaii also fits this bill.
That's what I remember, but I am sure there are many other examples.
As for space colonies: come on, does anyone doubt that if we find planets similar to Earth, that people would not want to live there eventually?
The only question is wheter it will all be under one govermnent or not. I suppose that will depend on the nature of Space Travel:
- If it is slow and communications hard, first colonial governments will basically be feudal and the planet will eventually turn independent.
- If Space/Time is mastered and we can move instantly between systems (or even between planets in different systems), then they would just be extensions of the mother planet.
That's my fault for not narrowing down the type of colony. The type you are describing for the most part are nothing more than frontier settlements. I was thinking more along the lines of the original thirteen colonies and England than the US and Utah. Frontier settlements work (for the most part) because they are absorbed back into the continuous whole of the parent country.
Which brings up my main reason behind thinking why space colonies will not be successful for Earth. And which you stated so well. Communications, unless we leap forward in amazing new technology, will be slow and difficult. This means that colonists will be under some sort of independent guidance and that they will be beyond the help of direct assistance from the Earth. And, just as in the case of the US, if the colony is successful it will quickly come to resent any interference or directives from the Earth the more self-sufficient it becomes. And more often than not this leads to warfare.
Red Mars!
Quote from: Berkut on October 20, 2009, 03:32:41 PM
Red Mars!
Would you be the guy shouting "Go, idiot, go!" before being killed by an avalanche? :)
I'm sure there's plenty of huddled asses who would love to build a new life somewhere over there.
Quote from: Faeelin on October 20, 2009, 02:43:20 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2009, 12:05:14 PM
Yes. They'd need to be economically viable at the very least. Something like an asteroid or offworld mining operation maybe. Or an orbital power generation station.
Again, why do you need people there?
need doesn't come into it. Being an option is enough for people to try it at some point.
simply because humans doing it > machines doing it.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on October 20, 2009, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: Faeelin on October 20, 2009, 02:43:20 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on October 20, 2009, 12:05:14 PM
Yes. They'd need to be economically viable at the very least. Something like an asteroid or offworld mining operation maybe. Or an orbital power generation station.
Again, why do you need people there?
simply because humans doing it > machines doing it.
I see you haven't had Ide perform oral on you.
Quote from: Caliga on October 20, 2009, 03:33:49 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 20, 2009, 03:32:41 PM
Red Mars!
Would you be the guy shouting "Go, idiot, go!" before being killed by an avalanche? :)
probably, except I wouldn't have murdered anyone first.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 20, 2009, 02:49:34 PM
If space travel is so expensive that trade is not feasible, then neither is colonization.
:huh:
The mortality rate of the initial colonizers of the new world was, by modern standards, prohibitively lethal. Of course, here we are, aren't we?
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 04:25:52 PM
The mortality rate of the initial colonizers of the new world was, by modern standards, prohibitively lethal. Of course, here we are, aren't we?
Sure, because it was still profitable.
Quote from: Faeelin on October 20, 2009, 04:27:06 PM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 04:25:52 PM
The mortality rate of the initial colonizers of the new world was, by modern standards, prohibitively lethal. Of course, here we are, aren't we?
Sure, because it was still profitable.
and plenty of people were dying in the homeland, so it wasn't like a huge issue. I mean, if we sent out a colony and 50% percent of them died, everyone in the west would bitch and it would be decades before they tried again, if not longer.
Quote from: HVC on October 20, 2009, 05:01:05 PMI mean, if we sent out a colony and 50% percent of them died, everyone in the west would bitch and it would be decades before they tried again, if not longer.
That's why future colonies will only be inhabited by Space Chinks
I'd be very surprised if that happens with space colonisation.
All our moon base tech will be tested to within a inch of its life before it leaves the atmosphere and all sorts of redundancies will be put in place. A few colonists dying accidentally would be a unforseen disaster.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 04:25:52 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 20, 2009, 02:49:34 PM
If space travel is so expensive that trade is not feasible, then neither is colonization.
:huh:
The mortality rate of the initial colonizers of the new world was, by modern standards, prohibitively lethal. Of course, here we are, aren't we?
We are somewhat more risk averse than our ancestors, as you should well know. Moreover, we are also not willing to accept the expense of doing great things, and nobody can make us do otherwise. Like the ancient Athenians, we have become convinced that the purpose of government is to serve the citizenry, and are unwilling to give money or service to the state. Like it did them, it'll destroy the West.
I think that part of it was the tendency of ancient peoples to anthropomorphize the universe. The universe could be counted on to look after them, or at least be placated. Today, we know that the universe doesn't care, and will erase us without prejudice.
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
What I dont see in my lifetime, but hope for in my grandchildren's, is settlement as a private enterprise. Start a dissenter colony somewhere, that sort of thing.
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:37:43 PM
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
Maybe we can finally find a place for all you high school dropout, bigoted secessionists, huh?
I wouldent know about 'us' high school dropouts, queequeg, but yes, wouldnt it be nice?
The majority of League of the South members have a college degree :mellow:
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:37:43 PM
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
Why are you so confident?
I want to believe? Humanity is making great strides on technology? There is a spiritual need for a new frontier?
You can count on empires to expand themselves? Stuff.
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:51:33 PM
I want to believe? Humanity is making great strides on technology? There is a spiritual need for a new frontier?
Humanity isn't really making great strides in technology. I'm afraid it's just wishful thinking on your part.
QuoteYou can count on empires to expand themselves? Stuff.
There's plenty of room to expand on the Earth.
Space sucks.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 09:39:20 PM
Maybe we can finally find a place for all you high school dropout, bigoted secessionists, huh?
:huh: He's in college right now, dude.
Quote from: Berkut on October 20, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
probably, except I wouldn't have murdered anyone first.
:lol:
What was that character's name again? Frank something... anyway he was awesome. I wanted to reach into the pages of the book and strangle that crazy Japanese hippy bitch. :mad:
It took centuries and better technology for colonization to happen across uncharted oceans. Also mercantile purposes, to make money, along with stable enough nations to undertake the travel and expense. If colonization of other planets is to happen there will have to be an increase in technology to enable the travel and existing on distant planets, and being more cost effective. Right now it's hard to see how colonization could really happen, but as technology advances we don't yet know what it may bring as regards space travel. But I feel certain that we will be traveling in space, with some kinds of settlements. We aren't going to just sit still on Earth in future centuries.
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 09:39:20 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:37:43 PM
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
Maybe we can finally find a place for all you high school dropout, bigoted secessionists, huh?
Been done in Pournelle's Codominium series of stories.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 21, 2009, 08:05:51 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 09:39:20 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:37:43 PM
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
Maybe we can finally find a place for all you high school dropout, bigoted secessionists, huh?
Been done in Pournelle's Codominium series of stories.
Yes.
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 21, 2009, 08:05:51 AM
Quote from: Queequeg on October 20, 2009, 09:39:20 PM
Quote from: Lettow77 on October 20, 2009, 09:37:43 PM
I am confident humanity will settle the stars.
Maybe we can finally find a place for all you high school dropout, bigoted secessionists, huh?
Been done in Pournelle's Codominium series of stories.
I liked the motie one. The others were kinda meh.
Quote from: Razgovory on October 21, 2009, 08:42:25 AM
I liked the motie one. The others were kinda meh.
The Mote books count? I thought the books he wrote with Niven don't.
Quote from: Caliga on October 21, 2009, 07:05:22 AM
Quote from: Berkut on October 20, 2009, 03:55:36 PM
probably, except I wouldn't have murdered anyone first.
:lol:
What was that character's name again? Frank something... anyway he was awesome. I wanted to reach into the pages of the book and strangle that crazy Japanese hippy bitch. :mad:
Frank Chalmers.
And yeah, Hiroko was a bit too annoying to take seriously.
Oh right! I remember now because he came across as a gruff jerk so in my head he was Supernintendo Chalmers. :lol:
Quote from: Caliga on October 21, 2009, 08:48:35 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 21, 2009, 08:42:25 AM
I liked the motie one. The others were kinda meh.
The Mote books count? I thought the books he wrote with Niven don't.
All in the same universe so they count. end of story. book closed. case opened and then burned liek any good Detroit pol.
Ok, that's fine. :)