That's the thing though, part of it is about caring. Part of it is being exposed to other things in order to realize there is more out there. I honestly think that STEM field education would benefit from including Liberal Art related courses exactly because of that. Basically as a way to broaden students world view and the way they might interact in it.

The same is probably true the other way around as well btw.

To be honest, they shouldn't do so directly. For the obvious reason you stated, they don't have a SLA to you or your company. But also because it is a shitty thing to do as a company. Companies should have their own proxies and mirrors for any repository they pull from. Both to be in control of the dependencies you as a company rely on and to not unnecessarily put load on free third party repositories.

Had not heard of your solution. More often than not I come across Harbor, Nexus or things like GCPs internal stuff.

That is a pretty big missing part. Not as big as the galaxy, but still huge.

Yeah to reach it with current tech. No shifting goal posts, thank you very much.

> In hundreds of years from now our rulers will definitely have that kind of tech, whatever tech it is.

Also, I should point out that technological progress isn't linear and guaranteed. Also, "our rulers" what ...?

With all due respect, this has been extensively debated online and is extremely easy to look up.

> Could those breakthroughs be achieved in the next 2 or 3 centuries?

Any predictions on future scientific breakthroughs are wishful thinking. Even directions that seem promising at some point can end up being dead ends and we simply don't know what we will or will not achieve.

With current technologies, even hypothetical ones we can't get there in a time period that is under a few centuries at best and over a millennium at worse. Even for the centuries figure we'd require technologies we haven't been able to crack yet.

So let's be optimistic and assume we can reach 10% of c (unlikely), that is 10 years for one light year, meaning that it takes about five centuries. Practically speaking 10% of c is unlikely, it takes about a month to accelerate to those speeds you'd need an insane amount of mass in the form of bombs to explode to just get up to speed. Which is why 3% is more "realistic". Oh, did I mention that there is no realistic way to slow down either? In theory it is just detonating the same amount of bombs in front of the craft, but in order to take that mass on your journey you'd need a lot more mass to get up to speed and the numbers get silly rather quickly.

So "realistically" at 3% of c we are talking about roughly 1500 years to just speed past our target.

Also, the original remark was about sending probes, not humans. But at 3% or 10% of c time dilation isn't much of a factor either so you'd need a generational craft if you want to send people.

Again, space is big, really big.

The speed of light is 1079 252 848 km/h, the fastest space craft ever made was the Parker Solar probe (using a sling shot) clocking in at 692 000 km/h. So at that speed it would take, 1559 years to travel one light year.

This planet sits at a distance of 48 light years, so it would 74 832 years to get there. Just for good measure, when it gets there it would also take 48 years for us to know that since radio travels at the speed of light.

Note, that the speed of the spacecraft I mentioned was the peak speed. Space is big, really big.

You might want to look up what the unix epoch is based on ;)

This planet sits at a distance of 48 light years, so it would 74 832 years to get there. Just for good measure, when it gets there it would also take 48 years for us to know that since radio travels at the speed of light.

Note, that the speed of the spacecraft I mentioned was the peak speed. Space is big, really big.

Some if it includes some schools teaching some of the more racists views of Mr Steiner.

Anyway, thanks for genuine chuckle your response got out of me.

And while I can't disagree it has benefited tech wages historically that is just one industry. Then there are also the recent mass layoffs.

Some would consider that a good thing. There is a lot to be said for VC in recent years not being beneficial for the economy, certainly on an individual level, other than "number go up".

> the Kashida section was contributed to this post from a talk in Arabic of Nawal Hadeed, which she translated and added to the post herself. Although I'm unsure of LLM usage in the translation process, looking at the original Arabic I felt some change in tone while editing the post. I could have either declined the translation and never have this documented, procrastinate in translating it myself (which has been ongoing for a while), or publish as it is. I found the last least damaging.