Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

simcoder t1_j9lp1x6 wrote

Complexity adds a diminishing returns factor the further you get down the tech tree. For instance, in the very early 1900s, a huge number of the tech advances were a result of someone figuratively tinkering in their garage. These days you often need the collaboration of large institutions or even nation states to continue those efforts.

We're also approaching the limits of material properties/chemistry. We're extracting just about all the useful work that is available by burning hydrogen in a rocket engine. There will always be improvements to be made but those will likely require large efforts for minor improvements. OFC, nanotube advances and such are also possible. But, those will tend to be fewer and farther between.

Tech advances will never stop. But the rate of change will likely slow down overall, maybe quite a bit. You will have the gamechangers like carbon nanotubes and maybe even fusion happening every once in a while. And those will be huge. But taking fusion for example. That might happen in 20 years. Or it might be 200 years.

That's not to say you shouldn't be excited about the future and advances and so forth. But maybe it wouldn't be the worst idea to temper the expectations a little bit.

3

SpaceAngel2001 t1_j9m3d3f wrote

If you are betting the pace of change will slow, I'll take that action. You're really fighting history with that one. Just as soon as we can make fuel outside the g well, everything changes. I've been pitched multiple times with ideas I don't think are ripe, but I do think they will happen.

And we are still a long ways from reaching potential from LEO. I've got multiple active deals trying to improve the human condition. The space economy is going to continue to grow even without going super geo.

2

simcoder t1_j9m9caa wrote

I would bet that the rate of technological advancement at the furthest ends of the tech tree will slow. I think it applies more broadly but certainly there will be areas where things continue to advance rapidly.

Regarding commercial opportunities here in Earth orbit, I'm sure there is huge potential. Particularly on the defense side, I'd imagine that's pretty much open ended as far as potential revenues and profits go.

But, I do think those profits will end up coming at the cost of the long term stability and commercial viability of Earth orbit. So, it's a bit tricky.

1

SpaceAngel2001 t1_j9mbb41 wrote

Your smart phone is real close to going global. Reconditioned Smart phones in Africa can be bought for <$7. But they've been slow to catch on bc the towers get stolen/destroyed too often. Move the towers into space and suddenly 1B new users have internet access. All the Einsteins and Beethovens that never got a chance to learn anything more than subsistence lvl farming get a better chance to reach their potential. China will find it more difficult to censor info.

Yes, it's going to take time, but good things are coming.

2

KeaboUltra t1_j9zprdh wrote

I cant agree with this considering the internet was a pretty big change and happened within our lifetime. Automation, combined with robotics will allow us to refine the manual world we're still transitioning from. This would be near the same level of shift as electricity had on the world. instead of people using electricity to power things and create a lot of QoL improvements (also the destruction of certain industries) so will AI automation as it becomes more refined. Despite that, I do understand your POV. I just think what constitutes as "trash" really depends on the focus of society.

People collaborate in large constitutions today all thanks to the interconnected world we now live in for the last 25-30 years. People collaborated in the past, but it's not like they could submit findings and results, etc in a digital archive and discuss them remotely and have world wide information in the palm of their hands

1