Is it really necessary to send humans to those places just to get the knock-on benefits? Couldn't we do those things directly, without going there?

It seems to me that, today, those who have the money to spend on these endeavors would only do so if there were perceived short-term benefits to themselves. That means they plan to exploit the resources, or increase their own power somehow.

I know the good engineers that make this happen are doing it for the challenge and in the pursuit of knowledge, and I know that's why we poors support it, but that doesn't "pay the bills." What is the motivation behind the money? Why are they really doing this?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The logical answer would be send robots. But, let's face it. They'll probably keep cloning and killing some poor bastard with fake implanted memory to do their bidding in a perpetual cycle.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1182345/

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago

    I don't think the logical answer is 'robots'. Humans are cheap and always have been, and it's easy to make more. That's the basis of human civilization for 500,000+ years. Expand, strip resources, and expand more. As we destroy this planet, we either find somewhere else to do the same, or perish as a species. Could you go the other way and limit resource exploitation, limit consumerism, limit unfettered reproduction? Sure. But that's not happening.

  • source
  • parent