this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024
507 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59438 readers
3065 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

We aren't even capable of caring for one another, let alone the EASIEST to maintain, most naturally human friendly habitat we would ever encounter in the cosmos as we evolved to fit it.

I would argue that having 8 billion people in the same place makes earth the hardest place to live in some ways.

One of the options that space habitats would allow for is smaller communities. What if you lived in a space station with roughly the population of a city? Your community wouldn't necessarily need to be affiliated with other communities to make up a "country", but it could be. Your community would have that option. And if the community is not geographically connected to the other members of its nation, there's no reason they couldn't change their mind, join a different country if you're views seem better aligned. For the first time humans would have opt-in governance.

Would opt-in governance lead to a more stable society? Would not being stuck geographically near communities with opposing views lead to less violent aggression? I don't know, but I hope so.