If we are capable of doing one, then we can do both.
this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2024
81 points (95.5% liked)
Asklemmy
43971 readers
955 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Both! All three!
We should stay fucking put until we figure out how to end greed and racism once and for all
Any ideas?
load more comments
(1 replies)
THE YEAR IS UNIVERSAL CENTURY 0079
C) Undersea habitat domes!
Colonizing Antarctica would be more reasonable than that.
What’s the purpose—research? Tax evasion? Shits and giggles?
Survival
Huge sci-fi lover here. But at the same time, colonization of space for humans is possibly impossible without avatars. The human body evolved here, and it's a vessel that works here the best. To colonize other worlds, it's more economically viable to send machines, create biologically synthesized new species (taking dna from local species there), and then transfer consciousness to them. Similar with Avatar, but without having to have the spaceships arrive in the planet full of humans. Humans remain on earth, and they project their consciousness somewhere else, in an instant due to entanglement.