Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Moderator: Outsider Moderators
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Just because something becomes technologically possible doesn't necessarily mean that there's any compelling reason to do it.
It's true that I'm going to resist a lot of transhuman technology for humanity in Outsider because that's not what the story is about, but also because I find a lot of it personally repellant. Just because it may soon be possible for humans to transform themselves into posthuman monstrosities doesn't necessarily mean that most or even many people will. Society won't always bend for every new invention; sometimes one or the other has to break. We don't all have household atomic reactors or flying cars today, not because they're not technically feasible, but because they not a good idea.
But Dyson Swarms are a non-starter, because humanity has literally no use for such a thing. I don't think you start building even a partial version of something on the off chance that you might someday find a use for it. Especially when building that something involves cannibalizing entire planets and takes hundreds if not thousands of years.
Is humanity building solar collectors? Sure, in convenient locations near to where the power will be used and closer to the Sun to improve efficiency. Is this the same thing as starting a Dyson Swarm? No, it isn't.
It's true that I'm going to resist a lot of transhuman technology for humanity in Outsider because that's not what the story is about, but also because I find a lot of it personally repellant. Just because it may soon be possible for humans to transform themselves into posthuman monstrosities doesn't necessarily mean that most or even many people will. Society won't always bend for every new invention; sometimes one or the other has to break. We don't all have household atomic reactors or flying cars today, not because they're not technically feasible, but because they not a good idea.
But Dyson Swarms are a non-starter, because humanity has literally no use for such a thing. I don't think you start building even a partial version of something on the off chance that you might someday find a use for it. Especially when building that something involves cannibalizing entire planets and takes hundreds if not thousands of years.
Is humanity building solar collectors? Sure, in convenient locations near to where the power will be used and closer to the Sun to improve efficiency. Is this the same thing as starting a Dyson Swarm? No, it isn't.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
a neural interface isn't in an of itself monsterous
-
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:27 pm
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
You can have it when you take it from my suspiciously warm boron-lined garage!Arioch wrote:We don't all have household atomic reactors or flying cars today, not because they're not technically feasible, but because they not a good idea.
Anyway, surely building a ring world would be done for the exact situation Alex is in.
"What's humanity about, you ask? Oh, let's go to these co-ordinates and I'll show you."
Basically it's like having a really sweet ride to help get you into Beryl's pants.
Or more seriously, prestige projects. I think if you had the capacity to build a ring world you'd have the capacity to just move the planets you'd have to cannibalize to build it into an earth-like orbit and then terraform them.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Pluses of having nuclear reactor at home at best questionable, pluses from hard cybernetics is obvious.
You will choose worker that works faster if you have a company, arent you?
You will choose worker that works faster if you have a company, arent you?
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Not if the costs and difficulties aren't worth the output of the worker. That's why the Romans never implemented the steam engine. Even though Slaves were just ubiquitous and more convenient.
-
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:27 pm
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Also there's a benefit to having ethnically homogenous or, in the future, technologically homogenous (ie, purely unenhanced), workforces.
Increases in productivity and workforce cohesion and inter-worker communication. Though there's draw-backs as well; increased workforce cohesion among workers who share ethnic interests (or who are united in being unenhanced) will have common cause, which may lead to increases in collective demands for better working conditions.
Increases in productivity and workforce cohesion and inter-worker communication. Though there's draw-backs as well; increased workforce cohesion among workers who share ethnic interests (or who are united in being unenhanced) will have common cause, which may lead to increases in collective demands for better working conditions.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
More worried about all the spam and subliminal advertising that would get dumped past your mental ad blockers and defense programs.
Plus tracking not only your movements, but potentially what you think about. Direct targeted adverts to what you are randomly thinking about at the moment. Or calling the police when you randomly think about a crime (not going to do it, just pissed off for a moment).
Plus tracking not only your movements, but potentially what you think about. Direct targeted adverts to what you are randomly thinking about at the moment. Or calling the police when you randomly think about a crime (not going to do it, just pissed off for a moment).
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
The devil is in the details so to speak, especially in the long term.asaenvolk wrote:a neural interface isn't in an of itself monsterous
How much it'll cost to maintain the thing, including regular software patches (you don't want to get it ransomwared, so until you pay up, you'll only see the goatse.cx album, and hear North Korean operas), how much it'll cost to replace it, if it needs and upgrade/the original vendor EOL'd it. How invasive will the surgeries will, not to mention things like rejection, or your nervous system don't wanting to cooperate with it, giving way to new and innovative neural diseases. Some of them would develop only years or decades after installation.
Remember, it'll be something that might be in place for decades, through most of the life of the individual.
We might reach a tech level in the future where it'd be like getting piercing, but expect the first few generations to be buggy as hell, as people are working out all the kinks, and bugs.
See the above. In the long term, you'll have to balance the costs of installing, and maintaining the cybernetics in the workers, including dealing with security issues, and occasionally dealing with replacements when they are let go/retire, plus all the health issues that can pop up, vs just going for robots, and more ergonomic tools/exoskeletons of which use you can train the baseline humans in a much shorter time, and you can more easily replace them if needed.Zorg56 wrote:Pluses of having nuclear reactor at home at best questionable, pluses from hard cybernetics is obvious.
You will choose worker that works faster if you have a company, arent you?
- RedDwarfIV
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:22 am
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Change the context and suddenly it does become a good idea. Take a Mars colony, for instance. Household atomic reactors would be useful because you don't have to periodically spend ages wiping off solar panels, they work at night, they work during dust storms, Mars is rich in heavy water so its easier to use unenriched uranium, and to top it all off, Mars gets a lot of radiation anyway so who cares if you get a little extra from the home powerplant?Arioch wrote:We don't all have household atomic reactors or flying cars today, not because they're not technically feasible, but because they not a good idea.
As for flying cars, Mars has 1/3rd the gravity so you can have much longer range. Exactly how it flies may differ, as its probably easiest just to mount a hot air balloon to it rather than wings (which would need a very large wingspan, making them hard to stow when not in use.) Such a vehicle could get halfway around the planet in a week, and let you drive around when you got there.
So the question is, in what context does a Dyson Swarm become a good idea?
I imagine it would be like cheap space launch. Once you have it, you're going to get all sorts of new uses from it. Dyson Swarms promise practically limitless cheap energy. Any industrial process or construction effort or scientific endeavour that is not being done because it would be too energy expensive would become possible.Arioch wrote:But Dyson Swarms are a non-starter, because humanity has literally no use for such a thing. I don't think you start building even a partial version of something on the off chance that you might someday find a use for it. Especially when building that something involves cannibalizing entire planets and takes hundreds if not thousands of years.
There doesn't have to be any single most important thing that a Dyson Swarm is needed for, it could be used to improve humanity's progress across the board. But there is one thing that makes a Dyson Swarm priceless - defence. Neither the Umiak nor the Loroi could threaten a humanity with the power of a star at its back by conventional means. No fleet could survive jumping into a system that can just blast them with the Sun's collected output in a beam weapon.
That doesn't mean its invulnerable - if you can build a Dyson Swarm, they can build a Nicoll-Dyson Beam. But as you note, Dyson Swarms take a lot of effort to build. A lot more effort than just building a fleet. At some point, you've got to ask if the effort of doing it is worth wiping out one star system that annoys you. Also, with jump tech, you could actually see such a beam coming, giving you time to evacuate and launch a retaliatory strike. Not the perfect plan, but better than being wiped out for nothing.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
While it is true that Dyson spheres/swarms on their own are not particularly useful to a civilization that has no need to use all of it, the idea that I've heard often is that this Dyson swarm would be built out of O'Neill cylinders, creating millions of citystates and micronations in almost infinite scalability and room for growth around a single star.
So in essence you don't build towards an end state, instead the end-state of the swarm is simply the moment your civilization stops expanding because of other reasons.
So in essence you don't build towards an end state, instead the end-state of the swarm is simply the moment your civilization stops expanding because of other reasons.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Heh, I'm gonna do an inelegant sidestep of the main question (the usability of Dyson swarms is about as far from us as the Three Gorges Dam is from Homo Erectus) an focus on two tidbits:
Here's a brochure from Moltex discussing the intricacies of their Stable Salt Reactor:
https://www.moltexenergy.com/learnmore/ ... tfolio.pdf
On page 23: "One of the waste products discussed above is the electrolyte salt. The salt can hold extremely high quantities of fission products by weight. As the fission products are the main heat producing elements in the medium term (primarily caesium and strontium) the salt is a valuable source of high grade heat that does not require maintenance and can be easily transported to its point of use. The quantity of heat available is in the kilowatt to hundreds of kilowatts range and can be extremely valuable for certain applications. These include remote military sites, space exploration, remote communities, hospitals and mines. Conventional fission product heat is too dilute to be usable. It is only now that it is in concentrated form that it becomes usable and valuable".
So put the stuff in an armored cylinder, bury it, and watch it heat itself for a few decades (all while incidentally turning it's contents into rare earth elements).
I, for one, suffer from polycystic kidney syndrome, so I'd be more than glad to find a way to permanently remove this danger (it can be kept under control, as I am doing, but the dread is real, especially with my family history). Same for cancer, diabetes, my horrible vision and a whole host of other things.
And I very much doubt that our primate brains will accept enhancements that are Borg-like in appearance. Most of the stuff will be hidden. Those people will simply be...better. Healthier, better looking, better memories, stronger, faster, more tireless...
I expect some people will opt out. That's fine. The Amish opt out for the trappings of modern technology. However... the Amish would fare very poorly in say Africa, or Europe, where others that have NOT made their choices have extreme advantages. So, yes, one can opt out, but there are consequences. You end up becoming obsolete (perhaps not in your lifetime, but eventually). Life is, after all, a competition. One grits his death and fights until death.
The only question is cost. If the wealthy become "better" then...yeah, you can see where I'm going with this....
Ya don't even need a full blown reactor. A fission product heat battery is all it takes to warm a small environ on, say, Mars.Arioch wrote:We don't all have household atomic reactors or flying cars today, not because they're not technically feasible, but because they not a good idea.
Here's a brochure from Moltex discussing the intricacies of their Stable Salt Reactor:
https://www.moltexenergy.com/learnmore/ ... tfolio.pdf
On page 23: "One of the waste products discussed above is the electrolyte salt. The salt can hold extremely high quantities of fission products by weight. As the fission products are the main heat producing elements in the medium term (primarily caesium and strontium) the salt is a valuable source of high grade heat that does not require maintenance and can be easily transported to its point of use. The quantity of heat available is in the kilowatt to hundreds of kilowatts range and can be extremely valuable for certain applications. These include remote military sites, space exploration, remote communities, hospitals and mines. Conventional fission product heat is too dilute to be usable. It is only now that it is in concentrated form that it becomes usable and valuable".
So put the stuff in an armored cylinder, bury it, and watch it heat itself for a few decades (all while incidentally turning it's contents into rare earth elements).
Monstrosities? You mean people with eidetic (but still selective!) memories, that could see in the dark, do not get cancers, can survive high doses of radiation, maintain fitness with ease, do not suffer from MS, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, lupus, IBD or age-related movement, mental or sensory decline? Growing teeth and limbs? Avoiding Down or Tourette syndrome?Arioch wrote:but also because I find a lot of it personally repellant. Just because it may soon be possible for humans to transform themselves into posthuman monstrosities doesn't necessarily mean that most or even many people will..
I, for one, suffer from polycystic kidney syndrome, so I'd be more than glad to find a way to permanently remove this danger (it can be kept under control, as I am doing, but the dread is real, especially with my family history). Same for cancer, diabetes, my horrible vision and a whole host of other things.
And I very much doubt that our primate brains will accept enhancements that are Borg-like in appearance. Most of the stuff will be hidden. Those people will simply be...better. Healthier, better looking, better memories, stronger, faster, more tireless...
I expect some people will opt out. That's fine. The Amish opt out for the trappings of modern technology. However... the Amish would fare very poorly in say Africa, or Europe, where others that have NOT made their choices have extreme advantages. So, yes, one can opt out, but there are consequences. You end up becoming obsolete (perhaps not in your lifetime, but eventually). Life is, after all, a competition. One grits his death and fights until death.
The only question is cost. If the wealthy become "better" then...yeah, you can see where I'm going with this....
- dragoongfa
- Posts: 1944
- Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:26 pm
- Location: Athens, Greece
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
I think that Arioch meant post human 'enhancements' that were more in line with the cybernetic enhancements from the 'Deus Ex' series, cybernetic limbs and enhancements that are inherently repellent in shape and form while being 'monstrous' in its strength and applications. What you describe is parallel to modern day pacemakers.Monstrosities? You mean people with eidetic (but still selective!) memories, that could see in the dark, do not get cancers, can survive high doses of radiation, maintain fitness with ease, do not suffer from MS, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, lupus, IBD or age-related movement, mental or sensory decline? Growing teeth and limbs? Avoiding Down or Tourette syndrome?
I, for one, suffer from polycystic kidney syndrome, so I'd be more than glad to find a way to permanently remove this danger (it can be kept under control, as I am doing, but the dread is real, especially with my family history). Same for cancer, diabetes, my horrible vision and a whole host of other things.
And I very much doubt that our primate brains will accept enhancements that are Borg-like in appearance. Most of the stuff will be hidden. Those people will simply be...better. Healthier, better looking, better memories, stronger, faster, more tireless...
I expect some people will opt out. That's fine. The Amish opt out for the trappings of modern technology. However... the Amish would fare very poorly in say Africa, or Europe, where others that have NOT made their choices have extreme advantages. So, yes, one can opt out, but there are consequences. You end up becoming obsolete (perhaps not in your lifetime, but eventually). Life is, after all, a competition. One grits his death and fights until death.
The only question is cost. If the wealthy become "better" then...yeah, you can see where I'm going with this....
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Yes.Mr.Tucker wrote:Monstrosities? You mean people with eidetic (but still selective!) memories, that could see in the dark, do not get cancers, can survive high doses of radiation, maintain fitness with ease, do not suffer from MS, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, lupus, IBD or age-related movement, mental or sensory decline?
It's a subjective thing, and different people will draw the line in different places, but I don't think most humans are as eager at the prospect of self-mutilation as your typical sample of hardcore science fiction fans. Right now in the United States, genetic modification of humans is illegal; this is not just some random government overreach, but instead represents (in my opinion) a deep apprehension of most people toward tampering with the fundamental nature of humanity. Maybe these attitudes will change in the future, and maybe they won't. My point is mainly that just because technology opens a door doesn't necessarily mean that society will be eager to walk through it. And the right of the individual to do as he pleases ends at the point where what he pleases threatens the stability of society.Mr.Tucker wrote:I expect some people will opt out. That's fine. The Amish opt out for the trappings of modern technology.
- RedDwarfIV
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:22 am
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
I've been reading Robert Zubrin's The Case For Space. He talks a lot about this sort of thing in it. You're right that most people on Earth have an apprehension about messing with what makes a human. But what happens when we start colonising the solar system? Who will be the first people on Mars?Arioch wrote:It's a subjective thing, and different people will draw the line in different places, but I don't think most humans are as eager at the prospect of self-mutilation as your typical sample of hardcore science fiction fans. Right now in the United States, genetic modification of humans is illegal; this is not just some random government overreach, but instead represents (in my opinion) a deep apprehension of most people toward tampering with the fundamental nature of humanity. Maybe these attitudes will change in the future, and maybe they won't. My point is mainly that just because technology opens a door doesn't necessarily mean that society will be eager to walk through it. And the right of the individual to do as he pleases ends at the point where what he pleases threatens the stability of society.
Hardcore science fiction fans.
Will that apprehension remain when people living on Mars are thinking about how cool it would be to have bones that could survive Earth gravity, or to make themselves resistant to the higher radiation so they can spend more time on the surface?
A frontier will be settled by the adventurous, not by the timid.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
I rather doubt that. Early colonization efforts will require a level of toughness, physical fitness and sheer drive that is... how to say it... somewhat lacking in most of the hardcore science fiction fans I know. And I include myself in that category. I don't think I would do very well on Mars.RedDwarfIV wrote:Who will be the first people on Mars?
Hardcore science fiction fans.
That said, I agree that the frontier will be the place where there is the most opportunity and reward to try formerly taboo things, due to the harsh demands of alien environments, enabled by the freedom from old world establishments. However, the pitfalls of the unintended consequences of social engineering will be just as dangerous on a new world as they are on the old one, if not more so. There is no guarantee that such experiments will work out as expected.
I have plenty of story ideas where there are gene tailoring experiments going on in the colony worlds, so I'm not saying that it won't happen. I'm saying that I don't necessarily expect it to become the norm, even in the colonies.
But the original question was about cyberpunk-style neural interfaces; we've kind of gotten off into the weeds here.
No doubt, but I don't think adventurousness and timidity is really what we're talking about here. There is nothing "timid" about holding traditional or conservative views of humanity. The frontiersmen of the Renaissance and early Industrial Age were extremely adventurous and not a bit timid, but they were also overwhelmingly extremely conservative and traditional when it came to social outlook and religion. I have a feeling that many if not most of the colonists in the extrasolar frontier are going to be very traditional, hardworking people looking for new independence and opportunity, but not necessarily a new definition of humanity. Frontier nations may be even more socially and ideologically conservative than those of the old world.RedDwarfIV wrote:A frontier will be settled by the adventurous, not by the timid.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
It is very easy to build a Dysonswarm but it takes a lot of time to do so, thousands of years or more. We could start building today if we really wanted but we better build our first space habitat in earth orbit first.
For hiding implants, well most people would but there are people that make massive alterations to their apperance to the point that they do not look human anymore. I saw a person with artificial horns added to his forehead, under the skin and that was just a minor alteration.
For hiding implants, well most people would but there are people that make massive alterations to their apperance to the point that they do not look human anymore. I saw a person with artificial horns added to his forehead, under the skin and that was just a minor alteration.
-
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:27 pm
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
The american frontier was certainly more conservative than europe, and remained so for far longer. Once my kind of people get to mars it's probably going to be crawling with conservatives and the amish. Star Trek will be Star Evangelism.Arioch wrote:I rather doubt that. Early colonization efforts will require a level of toughness, physical fitness and sheer drive that is... how to say it... somewhat lacking in most of the hardcore science fiction fans I know. And I include myself in that category. I don't think I would do very well on Mars.RedDwarfIV wrote:Who will be the first people on Mars?
Hardcore science fiction fans.
That said, I agree that the frontier will be the place where there is the most opportunity and reward to try formerly taboo things, due to the harsh demands of alien environments, enabled by the freedom from old world establishments. However, the pitfalls of the unintended consequences of social engineering will be just as dangerous on a new world as they are on the old one, if not more so. There is no guarantee that such experiments will work out as expected.
I have plenty of story ideas where there are gene tailoring experiments going on in the colony worlds, so I'm not saying that it won't happen. I'm saying that I don't necessarily expect it to become the norm, even in the colonies.
But the original question was about cyberpunk-style neural interfaces; we've kind of gotten off into the weeds here.
No doubt, but I don't think adventurousness and timidity is really what we're talking about here. There is nothing "timid" about holding traditional or conservative views of humanity. The frontiersmen of the Renaissance and early Industrial Age were extremely adventurous and not a bit timid, but they were also overwhelmingly extremely conservative and traditional when it came to social outlook and religion. I have a feeling that many if not most of the colonists in the extrasolar frontier are going to be very traditional, hardworking people looking for new independence and opportunity, but not necessarily a new definition of humanity. Frontier nations may be even more socially and ideologically conservative than those of the old world.RedDwarfIV wrote:A frontier will be settled by the adventurous, not by the timid.
- RedDwarfIV
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:22 am
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Most sci-fi nerds aren't astronauts, but most astronauts are sci-fi nerds. Yes, most hardcore sci-fi fans are not going to be suitable, but the ones that are will be the ones doing it, precisely because of how tough colonising Mars will be. Until colonies become properly established, to the point that normal people can live in them to a standard not far off from current Earth normal, its going to be way more difficult to live on Mars than on Earth and just paying people more isn't going to cut it. You'll need people who want to be there.Arioch wrote: I rather doubt that. Early colonization efforts will require a level of toughness, physical fitness and sheer drive that is... how to say it... somewhat lacking in most of the hardcore science fiction fans I know. And I include myself in that category. I don't think I would do very well on Mars.
That said, I agree that the frontier will be the place where there is the most opportunity and reward to try formerly taboo things, due to the harsh demands of alien environments, enabled by the freedom from old world establishments. However, the pitfalls of the unintended consequences of social engineering will be just as dangerous on a new world as they are on the old one, if not more so. There is no guarantee that such experiments will work out as expected.
I have plenty of story ideas where there are gene tailoring experiments going on in the colony worlds, so I'm not saying that it won't happen. I'm saying that I don't necessarily expect it to become the norm, even in the colonies.
But the original question was about cyberpunk-style neural interfaces; we've kind of gotten off into the weeds here.
The experiments that don't work will pack up and go back to Earth. The ones that do work will stay, and may offer proof of concept for others. That's a feature, not a bug.
Its true that it won't neccesarily become normal. Please don't get the idea that I am telling you that you are making the setting wrong. Most sci-fi settings avoid topics like transhumanism, because it can make it harder to relate to the characters. Even in the setting I'm writing, transhumanism is not common and tends to be confined to specific colonies or asteroid habitats, and they probably are seen as weird.
Good point, well put. I can imagine people leaving Earth to escape political correctness and the continual social drift towards left wing values. Though I can also see radicals like communists and fascists leaving Earth to set up colonies where they won't be interfered with and can work with likeminded people, rather than imposing their beliefs on an unwilling population.Arioch wrote:No doubt, but I don't think adventurousness and timidity is really what we're talking about here. There is nothing "timid" about holding traditional or conservative views of humanity. The frontiersmen of the Renaissance and early Industrial Age were extremely adventurous and not a bit timid, but they were also overwhelmingly extremely conservative and traditional when it came to social outlook and religion. I have a feeling that many if not most of the colonists in the extrasolar frontier are going to be very traditional, hardworking people looking for new independence and opportunity, but not necessarily a new definition of humanity. Frontier nations may be even more socially and ideologically conservative than those of the old world.RedDwarfIV wrote:A frontier will be settled by the adventurous, not by the timid.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
I can see both trying to settle on Mars...and than, eventually, the conflicts will start. Either with each other over resources and ideology, or first with Earth, as the "evil" overlord/imperialist world that needs liberation from, followed by eventual civil war on Mars....if they manage independence without being fixed politically and socially.Good point, well put. I can imagine people leaving Earth to escape political correctness and the continual social drift towards left wing values. Though I can also see radicals like communists and fascists leaving Earth to set up colonies where they won't be interfered with and can work with likeminded people, rather than imposing their beliefs on an unwilling population.
- RedDwarfIV
- Posts: 400
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:22 am
Re: Miscellaneous Terran question-and-answer thread
Congratulations on correctly guessing what part of the book series I'm writing will involve.Ithekro wrote:I can see both trying to settle on Mars...and than, eventually, the conflicts will start. Either with each other over resources and ideology, or first with Earth, as the "evil" overlord/imperialist world that needs liberation from, followed by eventual civil war on Mars....if they manage independence without being fixed politically and socially.Good point, well put. I can imagine people leaving Earth to escape political correctness and the continual social drift towards left wing values. Though I can also see radicals like communists and fascists leaving Earth to set up colonies where they won't be interfered with and can work with likeminded people, rather than imposing their beliefs on an unwilling population.
If every cloud had a silver lining, there would be a lot more plane crashes.