Re: [GZG] A number of scientists respond to Hawking's concerns about Aliens

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lI think (think)
that Dyer focuses to exclusion on the capital costs of doing space the
way nation-states do it. States might as well do it that way until they
run out of other people's money to spend; there's no incentive to find
another way, especially when the method chosen also enables a state to
drop crowbars and atomic bombs on a recalcitrant fellow state from orbit
if it determines a survival benefit from doing so.

Well, expecting private space to shoehorn itself into the state shoe
(delivery boys for the ISS/Satellite Repair'R'Us) doesn't offer much in
the way of incentive to innovate. An incentive that might make a
difference is twelve little words: "Whatever happens more than 125 miles
up is tax and tariff free."

That said, I grant that there are two significant challenges: First,
there's no getting around the work involved in getting mass up a gravity
well. There's going to be an irreducible minimum capital investment that
will be sizable. How sizable is beyond the angle of my forehead to say,
but if one can argue that Dyer is overstating the capital costs, one may
equally argue that private-space enthusiasts tend to handwave past the
significant technical (and thus capital) challenges. I invite those who
know more about those things than I do to weigh in.

Second, with respect to "tax/tariff free," one has to trust that future
state functionaries will honor the agreements made to that effect by
present state functionaries. The next time that happens will be
approximately the first. (As an aside, I just read Tim Minear's script
treatment for Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, now available
online. Pretty well done, with a couple of hokey bits.)

Best,
Ken