Edit: oops, skipped a few words and my eyes focused on "game".
No, you would be nothing the day after you die. It is that simple.
The problem was slightly different anyway, that is everyone being wiped out at the same time. Literally no body would care anymore.
The problem I have with the "eggs in a basket" line of thinking is that it raises extreme moral hazard to say we don't have to care about everyone as long as a few people are saved. Losing a basket of billions of eggs to save a dozen is cold comfort.
(Yes, I realize magnetic pole reversal isn't the same as nuclear holocaust, but I still don't feel my scepticism is misplaced.)
If someone offered you 5 bucks, with the caveat that if you take it then the Earth is destroyed the moment you die - you're a terrible person if you take the money.
(Incidentally, there's not really any difference between not experiencing something because you're dead, and not experiencing it because your back is turned. Are you fine with atrocities in general, provided you don't find out about them?)
Giving up the human species because zarchose will be unhappy he didn't survive the apocalypse seems a waste.
(For the record, I’m all for colonizing other locations)
Sometimes when I'm trying to doze off at night, I think about how strange our existence is. Not even the smartest people on this planet have any idea how or why the universe exists. We might never find out. We might be a simulation operated by higher beings, but that raises even more questions. Argh, what I would give to know.
Does that really matter in the grand scheme of things or is it just ego?
edit: To take it further, without some super-intelligent / supernatural beings it seems likely all structure in the universe will eventually disappear due to a heat death or a big crunch. Does even that matter?
My take is that we are just too young to have any idea what really matters in the grand scheme so the best approach is just try to survive.
UV wouldn't be much of an issue for concrete buildings, but anything plastic would be a no-no. How could we protect against other types of stellar particles?
And don't worry about nuclear power. Getting sufficient solar power won't be a problem with all those higher-energy particles getting through.
In fact I'm skeptical UV would be a big problem for humans at all. Aside from holing up in our houses and offices most of the day, we wear clothes.
On a side note is it a coincidence Golang has exactly 27 first class functions?
The real disaster would be in agriculture where climate shifts and increased UV would play havoc. A lot of people would starve and there would be refugee crises and wars all over the world. Indoor farming or farming under plastic sheeting shields would become a big thing in the developed world.
Thanks fo making me chuckle as I remembered the Sunblock 5000 ads in the original Robocop movie.
It's interesting to see how nobody worries about the ozone layer anymore, but somehow we may end up in the same place.
Our own civilization might suffer more as we are dependent on specialized agriculture that could be disrupted. At the very least you would want to invest in a good parasol and some sunglasses.
At a few hundred feet, a structure able to hold off the water pressure would probably be thick enough to hold off the radiation if installed on the surface. In rough numbers, the mass of air above us now is equivalent to about 10m depth of seawater. A few hundred feet, call it 100m, would be like having ten atmospheres worth of radiation absorption above us. We need not go that far. Relatively thin engineered coatings on glass/plastic sheets would be as effective at blocking the extra UV.
further some unpatched and critical vulns in systemd might actually prevent Peserverance from fulfilling its mission. I propose we send Lennart Poettering personally and at once (!) on a mission to sort it out.
NASA : https://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/tour/AAmag.html
There are a few good Reddit threads and some great /x threads concerning the book and the science.