[quote name='slicer4ever' timestamp='1354513684' post='5006506']
you're forgetting about the shear amount of money required to do this, the only way it will get done, is by taking a step and doing it, and if that step requires essentially creating an truman show, well, it's a start.

The thing I'm worried about with that is all the spectacular ways it is likely to fail, and how much it might put the public off from space exploration for a few decades.
It all sounds great in theory until people start dying in agony on live TV
[/quote]

That's been a risk since the very beginning, seriously the number of near misses that would have ended nasa if not for absolute pure luck is insane. I'm surprised we've managed to make it this far with such a small mortality rate.

[quote name='slicer4ever' timestamp='1354523963' post='5006538']
That's been a risk since the very beginning, seriously the number of near misses that would have ended nasa if not for absolute pure luck is insane. I'm surprised we've managed to make it this far with such a small mortality rate.

I see it as a big difference when the projects are founded by tax money and a genuine will to explore and evolve.
In this case you bring in lots of extra considerations of making it marketable and "good TV", so you maximize your ad revenue.
I don't think that is such a good idea, it promotes a very short sighted thinking, and "quick fixes".

Space exploration in general is a big risk yes, and because of that, cost might run amok sometimes, and has to be allowed to.
What if the company behind this goes bankrupt?
Well, maybe they can keep the astronauts "hostage", and tell people "well give us money now or these guys will slowly die on live TV".

There is a fine line to walk for the would be astronauts to actually die "for humanity" and not for <Insert Brand Here>.
[/quote]

I do see your point, and that is a good question on what could happen if the funding is suddenly cut, but that would be a risk to any future space colonization endeavors, regardless of how their being funded, what if a government goes to war, it suddenly becomes harder to try and support an extra-terrestrial colony, all you can hope for is that that doesn't happen before the colony is capable of self-sufficiency, and not relying on supply drops.

How long have you lived in Tokyo?

Over 4 years.

despite what you might want to think you still do live around "people "

Oh, is that what those black-haired things packed inside trains are?

They also have their gardens.

There are a few bushes and trees I pass on my way to work, but I prefer the cityscape and I generally completely look past all the green in favor of the tall shiny buildings.
Honestly grass is nothing I would miss, nor are trees.



I have also thought about the long-term future of the project, because it takes so much money.
What if they can simply no longer provide communications, send supplies, etc., 30 years later?
Being self-sufficient would happen quickly, however, so no one would die because of that. Just fewer people in the long run and no TV/Internet.
It would be more boring in that respect, but more fun in other respects. We would literally become our own independent colony, establish our own laws, elect leaders, and continue the growth of the colony “on our own”.

Look at the positive sides: Not a single STD on the planet, everyone is as intelligent as you are, etc. We would become a colony of ultimate humans, each one in top physical and mental shape.

And assuming communications do remain 30 years later, by that point we would be able to build our own rocket to return to Earth if we wanted.
It really wouldn’t be 1-way, though it would be a very very long lay-over.


L. Spiro

No, I won't go. While I love Mars ambience and I would make the trip listening to a lot of space music honestly I like to live here, on Earth and first of all on my wonderful isle: Sicily.