A Feasible Approach to Human Stasis for Long-Duration Deep Space Missions

Re:A Feasible Approach to Human Stasis for Long-Duration Dee... by macintux on Saturday April 21, 2018 @10:57PM (#16894488)

Peer pressure? Family pressure? "If you loved your family, you would do this for them."

The U.S. government keeps trying to force people in poverty to make harder decisions to be able to use the safety net. Is it so hard to imagine that someday one of the requirements would be subjecting yourself to experimental tests?

Those are just two ideas off the top of my head. I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments, but this does seem like a Pandora's box worth looking very carefully at before opening.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Feasible Approach to Human Stasis for Long-Duration Dee... by darawk on Sunday April 22, 2018 @03:23AM (#16895111)

So, poor people shouldn't have the option to do this, because if you give them the choice, someday a republican might make it a requirement of welfare? That seems like a bit of a silly argument.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Feasible Approach to Human Stasis for Long-Duration Dee... by macintux on Sunday April 22, 2018 @07:43AM (#16895759)

Was the point of this discussion to discuss why people may be concerned about unintended consequences or to blithely assert omniscience? Maybe I just picked the wrong thread.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Feasible Approach to Human Stasis for Long-Duration Dee... by darawk on Sunday April 22, 2018 @12:59PM (#16897071)

If all you're saying is that people could theoretically be concerned about that, then sure I agree. I just think the concern is misplaced.

[ Parent | on HN ]