I like the dots, they are visual, you can see at a glance - standing in the lab. You could graph your digital data of box usage in the lab over time from home. I understand you've attained desired function and have no reason to do that.

I'm not picking on you - I'm seeing this type of content all over and I also understand why we are retreating from digital spaces... but,

This is a clever "life hack" - partly bc it isn't reliant on any technology and that is clearly stated -> very functional but almost anti-tech, being such a hit on HN is actually quite interesting.

"My favorite toilet is the Ultramax by TOTO." , "Its model number is "xxx-xx-etc" - that man definitely believes in Ultramax!

Imagine a plumber talking about how much better his toilet is than everyone else's - bc everyone believes only a plumber can install it (which was truth for most of Linux history and general PC users).

Nobody took it seriously bc they took it as mostly an odd humblebrag for niche Windows haters.

The speed doesn't have to be much different - 366 days and earth will eventually hit asteroid - 364 days and it will eventually hit the earth.

Ahh, Im still having a hard time figuring out why that would take more energy - I'm going to be researching this all morning tomorrow.

Thanks for the help!

I may be confused but I dont mean a "larger orbit than the earth" -> I mean the exact identical orbit, the exact path that earth takes around the sun -> ahead (or behind, it does not matter) of where we are and instead of 365 days to circle the sun, the asteroid is moving at a rate that will take MORE days -> so the earth will smash into the asteroid, bc it can't do anything else. I dont mean "park" in the sense that I stop its movement, nor would I select an asteroid that has such an orbit that it couldn't be manipulated into position with little difficulty.

Like, imagine the solar system was a record on record player (I've never used one either) and the earth is on a line/groove - a choice asteroid is moving in the same direction on an immediately adjacent line/groove - the asteroid only needs to move onto the earth's groove (anywhere on that specific groove the earth occupies on the record works) and then the asteroid is then sped up or slowed down (not much tho) on that exact orbit -> either will result in a collision with earth.

The only real way to stop such activities is with spaceships. That is my entire argument - you are saying that is less feasible than making a missle out of an asteroid? I appreciate the explanation fr

Tbh, it wasn't until the game Terra Invicta that I really considered the solar system, as it actually is. That game has no other relevance to this particular conversation - good game, very different kind of 4x that I recommend but unrelated.

I hope your friend, having trained one of his personal AI to be you, at least consumes more dynomight content now!

I wish all us were as reflective as you are here:

"I keep finding myself unconsciously treating AI as an anomaly—as a weird thing that’s happening right now before the world goes back to being “normal”. But we aren’t going back. This is how it’s going to be. Like this but more so."

I'd love to buy into that plot armor but there is too much to take seriously by S6. The reality is, the first time a colony decided to it was independent enough, to use an asteroid - they would pick one, or many, so as to to render earth uninhabitable, there is no doing what they did in the show - thats how you lose a war AFTER having already used a weapon of last resort.

Once Inoki or w/e his name decided to use an asteroid, and one hits, the ONLY choice open to Earth is an immediate unconditional surrender. The only correct choice for asteroid #2 is one that will end all life on the planet without any doubt.

What's her name? The President would have killed us all and attained nothing doing so.

And yeah, it is perhaps the most extremely imbalanced strategic advantage that can be attained.

We feel safe here on earth but it's really a giant graveyard trap - that so effectively exerts control over life on it, that it made all living mammals out of mice - we may actually be safer on almost any other planet.

All life on earth has eventually died out so far, we are the 1st species that could stop the most likely extinction level event - but this DART is the closest we ever got to actually taking up that responsibility - the preservation of our species and whatnot, thats just 1 minor reason.

The most important tho, given how much we have example of people "getting theirs" at all other peoples expense - this is much worse if a non-state actor gets there 1st.

Lastly, I do have to clarify the American position - we run the world, or there will not be one to run. Nobody alive today made that decision - it changes nothing, once that choice was made, we are locked into it. Did you think we are only an economic power? That is the front. We can always pivot to actual power - the kind that can destroy all cities above a certain size - we have never hid this fact, the whole world knows of MAD. That is what power is.

What is American power if someone can destroy the US and we can't destroy them?? That doesn't work for the US - nothing at all changes if the US gets that spaceship first.

You can call this ugly - there were more modern wars before we started running things, from the looks of things - the whole world will go to war the moment we are out of the picture.

What if I make that the space battleship's job? What if a drone can do that?

Im not really worried about resupplying the space battleship holding earth hostage -> someone will "volunteer" to do that, bc they want to live life.

Plus - if countries don't do space wars - this will still happen 100%. It will just be a non-state actor - who do you nuke if Austin Powers is the bad guy from space?

Also, there seems to be a prevailing sense of "we'll just shoot it down" and that is actually extraordinarily unlikely - bc of all the space, in space. I wouldn't sit in orbit with my Space Battleship - maybe a lunar orbit.

Let's say I park halfway to the moon - ALL of my missiles will still hit earth, I don't think current defense systems would have any better odds - whats the difference between an ICBM that enters the atmosphere from space - shot from a silo or a spaceship?? Not much, functionally identical to the Space Battleship... missiles from earth tho, will be like in slow motion, the space battleship ought to be able to literally shoot them down with bullets - none will be able to surprise the space battleship, how do you even do a missle defense overwhelm tactic in such a situation - I can move the spaceship you know.

I may sound like I'm being unserious, but in reality, this is absolutely the future of warfare 100% - I can't be more serious, the humor is bc this topic makes me legitimately nervous.

Earth is spinning in a giant circle around the sun. Thats facts. "aiming an asteroid" is less of making a rock a missile - and a lot more of tug-boating it into the exact right spot, in the way of earth, so that earth hits the asteroid - not anything complicated like the asteroid hitting earth.

There are a lot of little things like that...

All required innovations - of which, most are not out of reach in the slightest, all of that tech would be immensely valuable, literally everything we do to secure space superiority will be actual gains - not smaller microchips equivalent innovations - entirely new machines, entirely new economies of scale - there is no equivalent military tech that we can develop on earth.

Not only is there really no conceivable way to ignore the strategic advantage once considered, the long-term economic payoff is actually reason enough alone to pursue the radical idea of a "space battleship" - I can think of about 20 ways to cause significant global issues with one measly space battleship.

As a hypothetical alone, it has reason enough to warrant a substantial amount of the 1.5 trillion defense budget the Pentagon plays with.

That is simply "Assured Destruction" with absolutely no mutual drawbacks or lingering consequences like radioactive wasteland. Just craters.

This is also something where the 1st country to achieve the "Space Battleship" could effectively prevent any other from also doing so...

In theory, Bezos or Musk could do it.

I don't understand why any country would bother with ground based military assets at this point.

Its also incredibly helpful if you dont know what you are doing. You can learn from an AI.

My biggest project I've used AI for was a book of poetry. AI can't write poetry very well at all - I don't think that I used a single AI written line (I had notebooks filled with writings from over the years) but in general I had absolutely no idea how to write poetry - I know exactly how to write it now - like as if I went to school for exactly that.

AI is also a better researcher than most people, so everyone ought to be using AI for search 100%.

I had 3 startups back in the day, none of them took off - I have not done any web development in over a decade, I'm in the early stages of starting a project that I should not be able to do and yet I am planning on doing it.

Millenials have aged.

We dont care enough to be bleeding hearts - so there best be no political conversation, bc we don't want to care.

There is a slice of us that refuse to even like interact with AI -> bc they are afraid of it, either taking their jobs or becoming Skynet - I have no idea.

If more interacted with AI they would realize AI is - maybe we would have more startups again, more personal projects - the majority of people on this platform have access now to something that renders solo/small team projects much, much more plausible -> so, where are they?

That you think AI is such a limiting thing is exactly what I mean.

HN is not more close minded - the People here are. Slowly becoming the boomers for Gen Alpha/Beta to hate.