|
Hewlett posted:Re-checked it, it's definitely not free in the US on Prime. For 'included with Prime' stuff, the logo usually has that silver bar on the top left corner that says 'Prime.' So now I was in "I'll show you" mode. Added it to my watchlist. Selected the 1st episode, and... there's no way to play it. It tells me "Videos you've purchased or rented are available to watch here". Apparently, to get around paying royalties to Apple, you can't purchase or rent stuff through the app. But you can add it to your watchlist? That's confusing and dumb. Just say I can't purchase poo poo there and have to use the web site to get it.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
Adding it to the watchlist makes it easier to find to buy
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
All these people posting in the evening saying that they can't find it on any streaming services probably spent the whole day looking forward to going home and rewatching The Expanse 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
My wife watched through all of it a few weeks ago on netflix, it's certainly been recently added in some countries I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
It's worth just buying it from iTunes or Google Play in the opinion of this dipshit loser.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:03
|
|
|
The Expanse absolutely is available via Prime in the US. I just fired up the first episode without an issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
I definitely apologize for adding to the confusion. I was legit excited thinking I could tell my dad he could use his Amazon account to watch Season 1. E: god drat it^^ really? I just went through the web interface the only option I could find was to purchase it. Proteus Jones fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Dec 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:The Expanse absolutely is available via Prime in the US. I just fired up the first episode without an issue. I have Prime and my only option is to buy the season.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
...
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:I have Prime and my only option is to buy the season. Same here. I wonder if it's by state or ISP or something.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
 Maybe it's regional? Virginia, USA. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Amazon datacentre de‐synchronisation?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
Yeah, it has to be an incomplete rollout. I'm in PA for reference on FiOS. It just went live today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
At home now and it shows up when I look at Amazon on my PC, just not on my phone or tablet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
East coast of the US here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:03
|
|
|
It shows up on all of my devices here in beautiful Oakland, California. Actually it shows up twice: as a purchase from back when it aired and as a free option through prime.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
withak posted:It shows up on all of my devices here in beautiful Oakland, California. Yep. I got it now. It shows up twice in the search options. Once as the paid version, and then as the Prime Video version.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
Deakul posted:East coast of the US here. That's clearly Afro-Eurasia. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
There is a preposterous amount of light in the ’stans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Earth has what like 20 billion in the expanse, something ridiculous. Gotta put those cities somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Earth has what like 20 billion in the expanse, something ridiculous. Gotta put those cities somewhere. Thirty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
Definitely available on Netflix in most European countries since November. It even briefly got on the main front page banner as a new addition. The Martian and The Expanse officially being in the same universe/continuity definitely makes perfect sense. What year is it in the Expanse? Is there a set date or should we assume around 2250? The Martian could be around 2050 if NASA suddenly became super well funded.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Evernoob posted:What year is it in the Expanse? Is there a set date or should we assume around 2250? The show is about 200 years from now. The books don't give a definite date, but it's further in the future. Someone claiming to be Ty Franck on another board claims the game the series was based on was called 2350, which would line up well enough with what we do know.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
I was always guessing 2400s for the books. 200 years is way too soon, I just ignore it in the show.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Well, it is too soon unless tomorrow suddenly the Epstein Drive gets discovered. An technology like that (basically unlimited energy to today's standards) sure can give a significant boost. Also at current population increases, 30 billion in 250 years doesn't seem too farfetched (if supported by the advancing technology.... food is not a problem as per quantity. The correct distribution of it however is.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 09:48
|
|
|
The Epstein drive was invented by someone from developed Mars though, if I remember right. It's also a relatively recent invention in the timeline. Mars and the Belt were colonized with pre-Epstein ships.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
200 years seems pretty reasonable given we've been adding about a billion people to the planet each decade for the last 60 years. If anything that seems really conservative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Mars and the Belt were colonized with pre-Epstein ships. Mars was colonised, but not the belt. Last page of “Drive”: “If he had control, he could reach the asteroid belt. He could go to the Jovian system and be the first person to walk on Europa and Ganymede. He isn’t going to, though. That’s going to be someone else. But when they get there, they will be carried by his drive. “And the war! If distance is measured in time, Mars just got very, very close to Earth while Earth is still very distant from Mars. That kind of asymmetry changes everything. He wonders how they’ll negotiate that. What they’ll do. All the lithium and molybdenum and tungsten anyone could want is within reach of mining companies now. They can go to the asteroid belt and the moons of Saturn and Jupiter. The thing that that kept Earth and Mars from ever reaching a lasting peace isn’t going to matter anymore.” Platystemon fucked around with this message at 10:40 on Dec 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Mars was colonised, but not the belt. Ah okay. That's worse then, the Belt and Jovian system seem to have been colonized for at least a century. WhiskeyWhiskers posted:200 years seems pretty reasonable given we've been adding about a billion people to the planet each decade for the last 60 years. Earth's population growth is slowing, but Earth is less the problem than Mars. Four billion on Mars in that short a timeframe is nuts. Especially since most/all are Martian born. There was a bit in Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars trilogy about moving people, like moving a million people a year from Earth to Mars is an enormous task in and of itself and that doesn't even get you close to the numbers. I don't think it matters much. The books never mention a year and it isn't a problem, I don't know why the TV series decided to explicit with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
Exponential growth is really powerful. If everyone does their duty for the Supporting that kind of population growth in an environment hostile to life is nuts, but it’s not outright impossible.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
The population of the earth went from around 1.5 billion circa 1900 to 7.5 billion today, assuming we're not strangled for resources (an assumption which is explicit in The Expanse) 30 billion in 200 years from now is really not unreasonable, and it's actually probably something like 32-35 billion including people living outside earth, which is still not unreasonable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Anyone doubting that we could have colonies on the Jovian moons in 200 years should remember that Orville Wright started his career in the bleeding edge high tech industry of bicycle repair and lived to see the jet engine, the V2 rocket, and the atom bomb. If we can go from not having any sort of heavier than air flight to having people in loving space in 60 years, then, if anything, The Expanse's timeline might be too conservative. Technological innovation can come at incredible speeds once the essential theory is worked out, especially if there's money in it. The social aspects are a little harder to explain, but I can sort of buy Mars being only 100-150 years old and the Belt having been colonized for less than a century. Ceres has kind of a former-boom town vibe, but it hasn't gone completely to seed yet. Three generations or so is plenty of time for them to develop their own national identity, especially given how isolated they are. The way Dawes described his horrible childhood also suggested that the Belt hadn't been colonized for that long and still had a hardscrabble pioneer vibe when he was growing up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
Counterpoint: no human has been farther than low Earth orbit in forty‐four years. The youngest person to exceed that altitude is now eighty years old.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 12:45
|
|
|
The sad, simple truth of it is that conflict drives innovation. And that funding needs some sort of tangible return on investment. So we won't really push to discover the technologies necessary to go to Mars, unless there's some form of space gold on Mars. Plus, it will rock the boat from the current status quo, where everything is energy (oil) dependent. So what's better than to curb research into paradigm shifts in power. Just look at how long electrical car development has been kept down. Since this is tviv; tl;dr we won't go to space untill everyone is in agreement that the earth is irrevocably hosed, and starts putting serious funding into it over 25 years
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Daktari posted:Since this is tviv; tl;dr we won't go to space untill everyone is in agreement that the earth is irrevocably hosed, and starts putting serious funding into it over 25 years Even in the Expanse world (to keep this from getting too off topic), humanity is still entirely dependent on Earth's biological resources. Sure there's plenty of minerals out there, but we're learning more and more that ecologies are what we need, not elements. And those are far more complicated than you'd imagine. Sure, with the Earth as our base of operations we can sustain human civilization across the solar system, but we can never replace it. Mars can't be terraformed in a lifetime. It's a project that might take thousands of years. Nowhere else is remotely set up to support a biosphere. Even massive space habitats would represent only a tiny fraction of Earth's biological resources, and as we've seen whenever we've tried to mess with that kind of stuff, that will cause problems. tl;dr: Sci-fi dreams of infinite possibilities are hosed up if they make us forget the finite limitations of reality. Nothing can save us if we gently caress up the Earth. (Also, more people should read Kim Stanley Robinson's Aurora.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Eiba posted:(Also, more people should read Kim Stanley Robinson's Aurora.) Totally agreeing with this, one of my favourite books of the last couple years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Eiba posted:This is kind of a tangent, but one thing I really appreciate about more recent Kim Stanley Robinson (Mars trillogy guy), is his emphasis that... if the Earth is hosed, we're hosed. We can't escape. So we need to develop space yogurt and we're good, awesome
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
We could totally build a civilization in big orbiting O'Neil cylinders, the theory is all sound and we even have the tech to do most of it right now. I'm sure there's be unexpected engineering and biological hurdles though. Biospheres get easier the bigger they are, but even a huge 10x2km tube or what ever is a spec compared to the earth. And even if we had thousands of pairs of tubes in orbit that were stable and self-sufficient, the earth will always be a treasure for its biodiversity. Everything in space will be a very simple "life web" or what ever entirely devoted to supporting humans and nothing else. Does it make air? Can we eat it? If not, we're probably not going to go to much trouble getting it rooted up in space with us. And yeah, terraforming mars is a pipe dream even with like 500 years from now super tech. It's going to be space tubes all the way down. What I think the interesting question is how space resources will be distributed. Will they be used to make earth a paradise and clean up the environment as most all heavy industry and resource gathering is done in space, or will space go all FYGM and build their own paradise while earth becomes obsolete for anything other than biology and tourism. Or will space be oppressed and used to prop up an ever-expanding earth, addicted to them space resources? I think it would really depend on the political and economic situation in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
e: eh ignore this post 
Strategic Tea fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Dec 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 13:01 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONBWBj9LnXQ Adam Savage explores the Rocinante with a 360° camera. This sounds pretty awesome but it's not available in Canada, has anyone been able to find an international mirror that works with the 360°?
|
|
#
?
Dec 23, 2016 02:25
|
|