Space Colonization (think tank)

Considering the cost, it seems more likely that rich capitalist organisations would band together and work with some bought-out governments to colonise outer space to do stuff. Perhaps less moral stuff.

I doubt the morality thing. All the good immoral acts require people to exploit, so they'd still need to be here.

Fight smart, not fair.

Hmm, that might be one way to start. Have rich, but bored people set up programs just to they can fulfill their own fantasies. Private Sector can get job done in half the time and the got money, and that they don't need to try to justify it to anyone(hence the speed).

Here's a hint: there's a reason everything NASA sends into space is so overengineered — manned space travel is a real life example of Everything Trying to Kill You. Cutting corners on safety is guaranteed to have tragic consequences for private sector space exploration.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Well I doubt private organisations care that much unless it impacts their profit margin.

Plus when I talk about immoral stuff like weapons development or some such.

Why in the world would corporations put weapons in space to fight each other? And getting people killed hurts the bottom line, far more so for companies than for governments.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Tragedy of the Commons: Sure if corporations were to arm up against each other it would hurt their bottom line, but the first to do so could very well make a good profit from it. And isn't the Tragedy of the Commons pretty much the basic problem of capitalism?

edited 2nd Feb '12 9:03:38 AM by Octo

Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 Fanfic

What? I never said they fight each other in space. That is sci-fi :P

No I meant like, testing a super nano-virus with 99.99999% kill rate of all mammal life. Or a new type of bomb that is much better than current nuclear weapons. Death-star beam. Radiation weapons. New dangerous chemical weapons. The kind of stuff that if done on earth would break a bajillion laws or be dangerous if released (especially biological weapons).

Well, I guess we have to talk about governmental philosophy.

I don't think corporations have a great track record for keeping an eye on worker safety, no matter how logical it is that they should do so. Corporations do run against their own interests sometimes, especially when overcome with a climate of short-sightedness.

Governments, however don't have a good record at running things where innovations are needed. We don't have to pretend here that all government employees are idealists striving to improve the world. Most, in fact, are just trying to get to the next paycheck, and eventually from there to a nice safe retirement.

I think both are necessary. The hounds of business and the leash of government. It may not be a friendly relationship, but a necessary one.

edited 2nd Feb '12 12:20:54 PM by FastEddie

Goal: Clear, Concise and Witty

I tend to figure that government is there for long-term thinking and in the case of space colonisation where there's a time period of several centuries of unprofitable schemes to be run to develop the technology base and infrastructure for space exploration and even just basic colonisation (terraforming is likely to be a multi-century endeavour), you'll need government to do it. However, if you make it open bid contracts, then you can get the "innovation" from private industry without having to run it as government.

But I would say that not everything is useful in terms of bid contracts because a lot of work is repeated and consistent, meaning that once one private corporation wins the contract, they basically have built up the industry for winning all future contracts.

I'm not sure how the connection between a corporate arms race and the tragedy of the commons is supposed to work; but that last sentence is nonsensical. The defining characteristic of capitalism is private ownership, and through extensive privatization the commons are eliminated so there can be no tragedy of them. This solution is of course far from perfect, but that is beyond the scope of this thread.

Where it applies to space, the international community went in the other direction. There can be no private ownership of space or celestial objects because they already belongs to all of humanity. (gross oversimplification.)

edited 2nd Feb '12 4:18:11 PM by GreatLich

So anyway, spin gravity ships.

I'm baaaaaaack

You seriously want everyone to hate you, don't you? Just drop that, we're moving on to another subject.

I'm baaaaaaack

What.

Technically useful, however I am wondering on constructing such things. They kinda require rather... special design and thus need to be constructed on orbit.

In the absence of an effective governmental presence, large, powerful yet competitive business interests will create one.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."

I have a feeling companies would tell workers to deal with it. A space hotel, maybe.

I'm baaaaaaack