All of Arturo Macias's Comments + Replies

Chomsky vs. Pax Democratica

Crossposted from Effective Altruism Forum: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/vjQ5BhKnDyY35dXXf/chomsky-vs-pax-democratica

Machines: Global Village Construction Set

I have been following this for years, but the project does not progress very much (there are more machines, but the community has not grown). The village set would be both useful for civilization RE-construction and for civilization (First) construction in poor countries. In my first post in the EA Forum I tried to produce some interest either in this project or some susbtitute, because no other open source project could be more useful.

Philosophy in Space

If fussion propulsion is possible, probably fussion would be available for energy production on Earth, and that would imply "energy too cheap to measure". The kind of economy under that regime would extremely different from ours. Under that conditions, for example, materials would be extremely easy to obtain from Earth (we could profitably mine minerals with far lower ore grades than we can now).

I think that if we ever reach the "energy too cheap to measure" economic regime, for example, extiction risk would be far lower than now. But we all know that Brazil is the country of the future, and allways will be, and that nuclear fussion will allways be 30 years in the future either...  I hope I am wrong in both :-)

Philosophy in Space

In a previous post I commented that before we deal with spaceships, we need a complete circular and almost self replicating human economy:

https://progressforum.org/posts/62XwqubkcAKNG6Wqf/space-colonization-and-the-closed-material-economy

This is the hardest problem

1Kassi Dick2yHello Arturo, I loved your article, and I agree, there is a lot more to space colonization than rockets. I was researching NASA's two training stations (by the way, if anyone has a Masters in STEM, you can apply to live on one of the practice stations) https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a37349989/nasa-mars-colony-simulation/ [https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a37349989/nasa-mars-colony-simulation/] and I think the main solutions to the problem of an isolated community on Mars would be: 1. 3d printing/CNC cutting with multiple materials 2. hydroponic systems using GMO plants and fish 3. automated construction systems with local materials where possible. I wonder if concrete is possible with Mars rock, or what kinds of minerals we'll be able to take advantage of. If the value of Mars material outweighs the cost of sending ships back and forth, it won't really be a closed system anymore. And if people live on the moon, or in low-orbit stations, as well as Earth, there will be new markets for trade and manufacturing. If you take a peak at some of my links to NASA's website, they do list a number of phenomenal projects on material science, energy capture/creation, plus terraforming tech. Still, without a feasible fuel source, it's hard to imagine actually making it to Mars let alone outside our solar system one day. That being said, what have you heard about fusion propulsion and what are your thoughts?
A 21st Century Progress Myth

It is obviously a critical consideration; beyond that, I would say that the best countries in the world are those with a long history of descentralization and a relatively less hierarchical urban structure: Switzerland, Germany and the United States. It makes life cheaper, allows people to live in bigger houses, the enviorment is better... Urbanization was a necessary evil and a necessary risk. Fortunately, less neccesary now.

1Christian Kleineidam2yI would prefer if progress goes in a way that decreases the chance of nuclear war instead of minimizing its chance. I like living in a big city. I like being close to other interesting people. I'd prefer it if even more interesting people would live in a short distance.
A 21st Century Progress Myth

Because cities are sitting ducks for nuclear weapons. We don't know if nuclear winter is real, but in case it were not, nuclear war would be survivable if human population and industry were spread.

1Christian Kleineidam2yWhen it comes to progress I would look for a world where reducing the damage done by nuclear weapons is not the prime consideration.
A 21st Century Progress Myth

There are obvious avenues for progress in our society: more income security, less working hours, ideally some degree of population de-concentration. Addionally, relatively poor countries still have a large room for economic improvement, and political and military risks are un un-acceptably large. 

On the other hand, your criticism of the "rockets and flying cars" progress ideal looks spot on to me.

2Christian Kleineidam2yWhy? I like being in a concentrated city. I like having a lot of interesting people near me.