this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2024
120 points (96.9% liked)

Asklemmy

48321 readers
350 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. 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.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nayminlwin@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

May be poulsen treatment or immortality cruciform from Hyperion. Not sure if immortality is such a good idea though. Throughout history horrible dictatorships tend to end after the death of the despots. Imagine if these horrible people are immortal...

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Open source non destructive Brain machine interfaces

I want to interact with machines at the speed of thought so bad. Not to mention what it could mean for people when they are disabled.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Saigonauticon@voltage.vn -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Perhaps the main use for technology is increasing the amount of inequality society can tolerate without collapse. I can't fix inequality -- that just seems to be what the humans want.

However by investing in surveillance technology, computer vision, and AI I could perhaps help our society to bear unbounded amounts of inequality indefinitely, without collapse. Social collapse is a less-than-zero-sum game, whereas an unequal society is still generally more-than-zero-sum. So I posit that the latter is objectively better.

Especially if you plan to survive long enough to get off this stinking rock -- you're going to need to concentrate resources, because the public sector only seems to be able to succeed at space travel under a very specific set of hard-to-replicate circumstances. Whereas greed, inflated egos, and concentrated power are easy to replicate.

Your objections will be noted.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lenz@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

An end to the problem of aging, and death. Whether that means turning into cyborgs, I don’t care. I just want to choose when I die. Not having dying slowly happen to me like a terminal illness. Plus life is way too short. If I get tired of immortality let me off myself. But let me at least get tired of it first.

[–] weeeeum@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly I'd be horrified knowing that without aging, a traumatic, fatal, accident becomes more and more likely as time passes to the point of being inevitable. Always on edge for that moment when it all suddenly comes to an end.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gorgritch_umie_killa@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Have you ever heard of de'beers diamond hoarding story. Thats like what i expect would happen to humanity if we gained the ability to live forever, 'manufactured scarcity'.

A tumultuous time of oligarchic rule with infighting to control the life extending technology. Eventually ending in a winner take all dictatorship. The masses would never see their lives extended (greener pastures visions may be made in the beginning). In fact common peoples lifespans would likely shorten as the controlling elite no longer required the same sort of widespread healthcare present even at todays standards, (depending upon where you live).

The elite would form a supplicant circle around the eventual dictator who maintains control, drip feeding the life extending technology to those who serve their dictatorship best.

Within a couple generations they won't be a dictator but our Monarch, and the common people will obey, and descend to a miserable condition.

I may have let my imagination loose today a bit...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sxan@midwest.social 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Every single suggestion so far has been positive, life-affirming, and productive, so I'm going to be Gru here for a change:

Bolos. AI tanks with no crew and heavily (Greek) Spartan-centric model training.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'll add mine here then. Cat Girl genetic engineering. It helps no one but the amount of non destructive upheavel from it be easy available would be entertaining.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Saigonauticon@voltage.vn 1 points 1 year ago

Don't worry, I'm here to help :)

[–] cabron_offsets@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Faster-than-light travel. Which is physically impossible, but whatever.

[–] HurlingDurling@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe not, if we where to find a cheat way with wormholes.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nanotech robots for garbage recycling.

Imagine if we dumped our trash into one end of a big fuckoff machine and out the other end it came out in microscopic pieces into hoppers for reuse or correct disposal.

Throw in an old appliance and out the other end comes the aluminium from the body, the steel, the copper from the wiring, the silica... you get the idea.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But they'd just realize we are all garbage and then gray goo the entire earth

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nah thats the dystopian version, op specified "Exotic" thats the one that doesnt go wrong and kill us all.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"Exotic" isn't synonymous with "safe"

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dont tell me how my hypothetical science fiction invention works, you dont understand the hypothetical sciemce fiction research we would be hypothetically doing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rustydomino@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Combustible lemons. But failing that, a portal gun.

[–] Saigonauticon@voltage.vn 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Lemons are already combustible?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Moonguide@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Bacta Tanks. Maybe a few days in one would fix my back.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 8 points 1 year ago

Nano-tech medicine, for sure. Injectable swarms of individually dumb, tiny robots which are controlled by an external AI doctor.

[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 year ago

I'd invest my billions with this guy

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Do I have to choose one? The world food program is never overfunded, and that would buy a stupid amount of lobbying for whatever overlooked domestic issue, or even just research grants for neglected but foundational things. Boring/ugly animals could also use conservation.

[–] MelastSB@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe we understood the question differently: are you saying that if you could choose between researching Star Trek's food replicator and feeding people for a day, you'd choose fish?

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. And cool wording by the way.

Assuming 100% success, yeah, replicators would be a great choice. Or maybe that skin cream that fixes everything including intangible life problems from that one short. Assuming actual science stuff, benevolent AI maybe, so we don't have to worry about the other kind, and so it can hopefully research everything else.

Giving it all away to mutual aid groups to have them figure out local issues.

[–] Scrof@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

Cybernetics hands down.

[–] Extrasvhx9he@lemmy.today 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Also clean energy but personally virtual reality 100%. Give me that SAO experience, damn it. Just without y'know the bad stuff

Edit: mandatory Link

[–] esc27@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Asteroid mining. This may still be too far off and too expensive. But the first person to get this working successfully will be a trillionare.

This plus fusion are the two things most needed to transition humanity to a space based civilization.

[–] BruceTwarzen@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

This seems like it would never be lucrative in any way shape or form.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Asteroid mining is incompatible with current capitalism. Say you harvest an asteroid with 100,000 of platinum in it. You in theory now have trollions of dollars in platinum for the $40 billion you spent harvesting the asteroid, only you have now quadrupled the amount of platinum in the economy, crayering the price and totally ruining your company. It's obviously a net good for humanity as a scarce resource is now abundant, but it is bad for capitalism because the ones who finaced the work are the biggest loser.

[–] Saigonauticon@voltage.vn 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No you've got it backward. The mining is a cover. You look for celestial bodies that require only a small delta-v to redirect to a collision event.

It's a proper hostage situation, once you've got the infrastructure to replicate it more cheaply than people can defend against it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 year ago

Or it'll be a gold rush situation where that guy will break even, but the people selling him rocket fuel will make a modest fortune. It's all dependent on how expensive the shipping method invented is.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments