How to fill a new Habitat?

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, omar vega wrote:
> Tangoman:
>
> No. I've not read it as yet, but I have read several
> related articles, and I'll buy that classic pretty
> soon. However, I think the question stand, for the
> following:
>
> (1) If SPS passes from theory to practice, there are
> still several problems to make it reliable and
> profitable, such as competing technologies (fusion,
> for example) that may be hard to beat.
>
> (2) The amount of materials required in space depends
> on the model developed at a given time. Material
> scientists always find new ways to improve things. It
> is posible to imagine large scale structures (miles
> around) made of a thin film surface, capable of
> concentrating power without much expenses in
> construction. In space the size of something is not a
> big deal. I have no doubt that relatively chear SPS
> pototypes will be tried in the near future without the
> need of a massive construction team.
>
> (3) Robotics and engineering advance at great pace.
> Exprorers send robots to the bottom of the sea, and no
> men. I don't se why it is impossible to construct in
> space large, but simple, structures with the help of
> robots. It is a lot cheaper than sending humans there.
>
> Therefore, I think space settlement can't count in SPS
> as an assured source of revenues. It may be a
> possibility, however, but should not be considered the
> main reason to construct space islands.
>
> Omar Vega
>
Robots are very good at routine.

But they cannot handle the unexpected.

We are going to need humans out there for that. And to be blunt,
humans may be cheaper than robots. We may see people out there
because they will be cheaper than an equal numbers of robots.

Right now, a three-year old is better at pattern recognition than a robot.

Apparently some things people do are not as simple as we thought.

Rick Brooks