Elon Musk: First Humans Who Journey To Mars Must 'Be Prepared To Die' (theverge.com) 474
At a conference yesterday, Elon Musk outlined his company SpaceX's plan to send humans to Mars. The vehicle is called the Interplanetary Transport System and it is capable of carrying 100 tons of cargo (people and supplies). Musk added that this rocket ship could take people to Mars in just 80 days. But he also reminded that the first batch of people who are brave enough to go to Mars should be well aware that they are almost certainly going to die. The Verge adds:During the Q&A session that followed, the question inevitably came up: what sort of person does Musk think will volunteer to get strapped to that big rocket and fired toward the Red Planet? "Who should these people be, carrying the light of humanity to Mars for all of us?" an audience member asked. "I think the first journeys to Mars will be really very dangerous," answered Musk. "The risk of fatality will be high. There's just no way around it." The journey itself would take around 80 days, according to the plan and ideas that Musk put forward. "Are you prepared to die? If that's okay, then you're a candidate for going," he added. But Musk didn't want to get stuck talking about the risks and immense danger. "This is less about who goes there first... the thing that really matters is making a self-sustaining civilization on Mars as fast as possible. This is different than Apollo. This is really about minimizing existential risk and having a tremendous sense of adventure," he said.
News Flash! (Score:5, Insightful)
We're all going to die.
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Insightful)
We're all going to die.
We're all going to die. The difference is the legacy you leave behind. For most people, it's their children. Others try to make a lasting impressions in other ways. Dying while colonizing Mars is one of those ways.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm actually really torn.
While I expect I'd be DQ'd for other reasons (I'm 6'1"/250lbs) I would love to volunteer, but don't want to abandon my kids.
-nb
Re:News Flash! (Score:4, Informative)
I would love to volunteer, but don't want to abandon my kids.
That is why I loved the movie interstellar. It's one of the main conflicts in the film.
Re: (Score:2)
Musk is on a mission to make the Earth (and Mars) a better place. He has accomplished amazing things.
I think his statement was just reflecting the reality of the difficulty of the mission to Mars. This is a real possibility of failure and death.
Some people will take this risk.
Re: (Score:2)
"all of them... better worlds"
Re:News Flash! (Score:4, Insightful)
I've never understood the need to leave a legacy...
The point of a legacy isn't some sense of satisfaction post-mortem, it's the notion that as long as some part of you carries on, what you're doing now isn't pointless.
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Interesting)
What I'm doing now is completely pointless.
I'm ok with that.
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm happy being the center of my pointless existence. Takes the pressure off.
Re:News Flash! (Score:4, Funny)
Well duh, you're on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
would you press the button to end all of humanity in exchange for a mystic vial of infinite happiness potion?
At this point, I'd press the button for a god damn Klondike bar.
Re:News Flash! (Score:4, Informative)
Not correct at all.
Parents, domestic, social, and educational pressures can be massively different for different siblings in the same household.
Read some academic research into first child syndrome [wikipedia.org].
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Funny)
Nope! I'm gonna have my brain cryogenically frozen, and be scanned into a brain emulator 200 or so years from now when tech advances.
Thus, I'll still be trolling Slashdot for thousands and thousands of years! Bwwaaaaa ha ha ha
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Funny)
And on that date in the future when they unthaw your brain you will see not one but TWO stories on /. about it.
Re: (Score:3)
It'll be a word in the future...I'm a trend setter
Re: (Score:3)
Well, as it turns out, "unthaw" is actually a word, and in North America, it means the same as "thaw" when it's used as a verb (as you did). When used as in the sentence "you can cook prawns from frozen by plunging them, unthawed, into boiling water", it means frozen. I hereby retract my snark. Credit to Oxford Dictionary. [oxforddictionaries.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, but I'd rather die later than sooner. And I'm willing to be that people at the end of their life won't be fit enough to go.
Re:News Flash! (Score:4, Interesting)
I like it so far....
I can't think of anything or anyone that would be worth sacrificing my life for....
I'd just as soon watch the Mars progress on TV and enjoy beer, Air Conditioning and less threat of death....you guys have fun with that up there!!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: News Flash! (Score:5, Insightful)
It is honest but is also sad but more terrifying than anything else. If an individual is so self centered that they cannot imagine dying for someone else we are in trouble as a society. "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" isn't just a movie quote but is, in fact, what makes society work. Hopefully, if ever faced with a real threat that makes this choice necessary, you will find the strength to put others first.
Would die to save your mother? Your father? Your wife and/or kids? How about another person and their family? Would you let a dozen people die to save yourself?
Don't be glib. Others have died so you could live. Why is your life more important than theirs. What color is your snowflake?
Re: News Flash! (Score:5, Insightful)
Would die to save your mother? Your father? Your wife and/or kids? How about another person and their family? Would you let a dozen people die to save yourself?
I don't know about you, but my mother is elderly and not likely to live that much longer unfortunately. I'm quite sure she would *not* want me sacrificing myself for her. In fact, I have a hard time imagining *any* parent who would want that. Parents, unless they're sociopaths (or their kid's a real shitball), *always* want their children to outlive them.
If I had any kids, and I had spent many years and my resources raising them and providing for them, the last thing I'd want is to have them sacrifice themselves so I can live a little longer. They're young; I'm presumably not.
For normal, rational people, the only people they should be really willing to die for are their kids, and maybe their spouse (usually the wife more than the husband, as part of that "women and children first" idea that goes back to antiquity). Parents, no (this doesn't mean you shouldn't try to save them, but not if it's an obvious suicide mission). Strangers? Not so much; maybe if it's a bunch of them.
Others have died so you could live.
No, they haven't. My life has never been in mortal danger where someone had to sacrifice themselves for me to avoid death. (In fact, I don't think my life's ever been in mortal danger at all, unless there was some close call somewhere that I was never even aware of.)
Re: (Score:3)
That phrase isn't about someone stepping in front of a bullet for you within your lifetime, you're not thinking far back enough.
Consider any exploration your ancestors benefited from, anyone who fought to protect your way of life in a war, or going back far enough simply working out what was food and what was poison by trail and error. Your existence has been possible from the sacrifices of others risking their lives for land, food, knowledge, freedom..
Re: News Flash! (Score:5, Insightful)
Until you have found something worth dying for , you have never really loved, If you have not loved, you haven't really lived either.
Re: News Flash! (Score:5, Funny)
You should change your name to "Hallmark"
You win for the corniest bullshit ever posted to slashdot. Grats
Good luck with that... (Score:3)
Your son is your time machine? I can already tell your son is very young and not that developed, yet. All newer parents talk like you. Where they believe their children are basically conduits to their own past. Where you can correct your own past mistakes by having your son not make them. You. Could. Not. Be. More. Wrong. Seriously. Do yourself a favor and stop walking down this path while you still can. Your child will be the most healthy if you treat them like they are *their own person* (whi
Re: (Score:3)
Some men also prefer to die in a nursing home - old, decrepit, and can't even retain his bowels, let alone remember his name.
Not sure what kind of a life goal that would be...
Re: (Score:2)
Well... me too. I wouldn't risk my life to go to Mars. The thing is though; I don't have to.
There are plenty of people who are. Maybe they dream of having people trace their roots back to being one of the founding fathers of Mars. Or having a city named after them. (must admit McWeanyville does have a ring to it).
Meh! Not for me though- I will stay on green-green earth; however, I understand the motivation for those who are more adventurous than you and I. Most people won't want to leave, but plenty
Re:News Flash! (Score:5, Funny)
Go be fat, disgusting, lazy, undisciplined, uneducated and unhealthy somewhere else...like Mars. Since fat people don't do anything for the world in life, maybe they can contribute some small amount in death.
The ghosts of Winston Churchill, William the Conqueror, Henry VIII, Catherine the Great, Ben Franklin, Babe Ruth, Alfred Hitchcock, Thomas Aquinas, Queen Victoria, and Theodore Roosevelt would like a word with you. The rest of us are mildly curious about what you as an individual have done "for the world".
meh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:meh (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, but streaming porn will be a problem from the Martian basement. :(
Re: meh (Score:5, Funny)
Yes. Being able to make large quantities of nutritious, flavorful bread is essential to Mars colonization.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This Official NASA Research [nasa.gov] is studying the egg problem.
There is also a proposal to import green cheese from the Moon.
Gotta love brutal honesty. (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact of the matter is he's right. And even if they do make the trip back, the probability that they will have crippling health issues is high. Exploring any frontier was dangerous throughout human history.
Re:Gotta love brutal honesty. (Score:5, Funny)
Several weeks in a spaceship is going to be tedious.
Fuck, it's a good thing Columbus and crew had their iPhones with them to keep from getting bored.
Re:Gotta love brutal honesty. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I gather you're just a useless troll and getting what you deserve.
Everybody should be prepared to die. (Score:4, Funny)
Out of several tens of billions of humans, only a fraction have not yet died, and of those who died, only a small percent of disputed cases indicate recovery.
Re:Everybody should be prepared to die. (Score:5, Funny)
Keanu Reeves is still under investigation.
Re:Everybody should be prepared to die. (Score:5, Funny)
On the contrary, I have never died before and rumors that I would do so are spread by fact-checkers of the liberal press and corrupt global warming scientists.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been scared half to death. Twice.
Re: (Score:3)
Of the 108 billion people who have ever lived, about 7 billion are still alive. Therefore, statistically the chance of death is only about 93%.
Re: (Score:3)
Even the barest minimum fact checking comes up with a Wikipedia article [wikipedia.org] that cites numerous studies:
"Estimates of the total number of humans who have ever lived range in the order of 100 billion. Estimates of this kind cannot hope to give more than the rough order of magnitude, as even modern population estimates are fraught with uncertainties of the order of 3% to 5%. Kapitzka (1996) cites estimates ranging between 80 and 150 billion. Another such estimate was prepared by Haub (1995), updated in 2002 and 2
Nomination (Score:5, Insightful)
I nominate Congress to go on the first voyage. This would be the best use of taxpayer money ever.
Re: (Score:2)
how meany people on death row will take this? (Score:2)
how meany people on death row will take this?
Re: (Score:2)
how meany people on death row will take this?
Doesn't matter. First, they don't just need warm bodies, but trained people who can actually do the job. Probably not too many highly trained people with the skills needed on death row. Second, just because they must be prepared to die, doesn't mean they should be expecting to die. Psychologically, it will be hard enough with morale and other issues without sending people on what is expected to be a death sentence. They will be sent on a dangerous mission that will have every bit of aid needed to succeed. T
Re:how meany people on death row will take this? (Score:5, Funny)
Australia should send all their prisoners to Mars just to be ironic.
It's tempting (Score:5, Funny)
At least I'd get away from all the Elon Musk stories.
16-17th century sailors (Score:4, Insightful)
Humans have precedent for sending out vessels filled with people who have a good chance of dying on their journey.
Why do you have to be prepared for it? (Score:5, Interesting)
What is the difference if you are not prepared? Will you fail at it?
Re:Why do you have to be prepared for it? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you're not prepared to die, you're likelier to panic, do something stupid, and then die.
Re: (Score:2)
What is the difference if you are not prepared? Will you fail at it?
Quite possibly. Risk aversion in a situation where risk is needed to survive could spell doom for everybody.
Re:Why do you have to be prepared for it? (Score:4, Insightful)
What is the difference if you are not prepared? Will you fail at it?
Quite possibly...
Imagine this scenario: You're halfway there, and part of the life support system break down, and can't be fixed en route. The vessel can now only support half of the people on board. If the passengers aren't prepared to calmly figure out who stays and who goes, and half the people aren't prepared to go quietly, the resulting riot will probably doom the entire mission.
Unpleasant contingency plans for that sort of thing have to be made, and the passengers must be prepared to follow them. There won't be any lifeboats.
Re: (Score:3)
What is the difference if you are not prepared? Will you fail at it?
I tried to kill myself by jumping off of a building, but I can't even do that right. I ended up doing a double back flip and landing on my feet. On the street next to me were two kittens. One turned to the other and said, "See, that's how it's done."
Slight spin on an old Steven Wright joke.
Self-sustaining civilization on Mars (Score:3, Insightful)
How about we first master having a self-sustaining civilization on Earth?
Re:Self-sustaining civilization on Mars (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't know, but I got the impression that Elon has factored this into his planning. He is working on the basis that mankind is incapable of "doing the sensible stuff first", as you suggest. Instead, he is working on the premise that by the time that we realise that the Earth has been harmed beyond the point of recovery, then it will be too late to start a colonisation program. He's basically saying that we need those colonies to exist and be stable for the day that mankind wakes up and realises that the planet is doomed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The same technology it would take to build self-sustaining colonies on Mars could much more easily build self-sustaining colonies on Earth. Mars is already a desolate wasteland; if we could work out how to survive there, then we could, much more easily, work out how to survive Earth becoming a desolate wasteland, even if we couldn't stop other people from making that happen.
Until we can have self-sustaining cities at the poles, in the middle of the world's deserts, on the seafloor, etc -- all much more hosp
Re: (Score:3)
That takes global agreement. We only need to look around to realise that we're pretty rubbish at that...
The only way we'll get good at that IMO is to colonize another planet. Humans are pretty good about pulling together in rivalry with an other. Earth vs Mars in the Sol Cup? You'd get some global unity.
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that we have not mastered it is reason enough to go. The basic idea is to increase our chances of surviving as a species when the next asteroid strikes or some idiot pushes the button. That's why sustainability is the key and why no one's talking about mining Martian gold to ship back home.
And after that we need to build an Ark before the sun blows up. Yes, a whole different order of magnitude, but that's the ultimate goal here. And no problem if you don't like the idea and can find a million reaso
Doesn't anyone read sci-fi? (Score:5, Funny)
The Startup Ecosystem (Score:2)
The first Mars colony is always wiped out. It's the second one that thrives -- after 90% of the colonists are wiped out.
So what you're saying is that Mars is a VC firm and the colonies are startups?
comment subject (Score:2)
That said, I have doubts that the heroic efforts I just compared to are actually available. Obviously Musk is going to make Mars work (and funding) seem as plausible as he can.
"must be prepared to die" (Score:5, Funny)
Isn't that also in the Microsoft License Agreement?
Re: (Score:2)
It's hidden in the 200 page EULA, right before, "I agree to be Bill Gate's biatch when I get to hell".
The real store behind the one-way ticket... (Score:2)
This is all so pointless (Score:4, Insightful)
If your goal is a self-sufficient colony on mars and your serious about it your opening move will not involve sending people there initially because this would be a pointless waste of resources.
It isn't enough to just preposition supplies you need to develop and transport a highly automated industrial base using technology that does not yet exist to create the things people will need to survive.
The solution today is basic research and development not building space buses and telling riders they are probably going to die.
You can't just ignore reality and subscribe to new age planning doesn't matter we don't need to learn how to walk first nonsense because if you do that you will fail.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't enough to just preposition supplies you need to develop and transport a highly automated industrial base using technology that does not yet exist to create the things people will need to survive.
Is that how the Americas were colonized by the Europeans?
Re:This is all so pointless (Score:4, Insightful)
There is nothing whatsoever in Musk's plans that prohibit them from sending 10 (or 100) ships up first that are loaded with cargo for the first colonists. In fact, doing otherwise would be ridiculous. Don't take the video quite so literally.
Musk himself said he is focused on building the transportation infrastucture, not the colony itself. He is leaving that to others and basically inviting people with resources and ideas to join in.
- Necron69
Westward Ho! (Score:3)
Many people cannot envision a one way journey but others can. My great grandfather came to the US to join his sons. My great grandmother did not.
Some Artistic License (Score:2)
I like the part in the SpaceX video where the rocket lands, and the door opens on magnificent desolation. This is artistic license. Obviously the material for a habitat would precede the arrival of people.
But yes, a first-try planetary colony won't necessarily work. Getting there is dangerous, and once you're there being able to continue to provide the population with air, water, food, shelter, and energy is going to have significant risks of lethal failures.
If you are into that (Score:5, Insightful)
So I have this friend with a father who is a Vietnam war hero. When the base was under attack, he would grab the nearest weapon he could get his hands on and run toward the enemy. He won a medal for demonstrating that after the enemy shoots the tail off your helicopter, it is indeed still flyable if you go just go fast enough. Funny thing was, his very successful military career was something of an accident. Before joining the army, when there was nothing at stake and nothing to be gained by it, he would get in trouble by doing some damn fool wild thing. After the umpteenth time the judge finally told him, it's the jail or the military, you choose.
It took a long time for me to understand because I am not like that myself, but some people need high-risk, crazy adventure to thrive. If that is denied to them, they will seize it anyway, however they can. So those people might as well expend that impulse on something socially redeeming, like establishing off-world human colonies, while the rest of us cower here on earth until interplanetary transport is proven safe.
Why Mars? (Score:2)
Why not the moon?
Oh sure, we've been there before... but seriously, if the goal is to build a self-sustaining permanent habitat as soon as possible, then why not build one on the moon first?
I'm not saying that we shouldn't go to Mars eventually, but I think talking about it before we've even started to seriously talk about colonizing the lunar surface, let alone doing it, is really putting the cart before the horse.
At the very least, the moon is less than a hundredth as far. Why do the people who p
Re: (Score:3)
Why not the moon?
Off the top of my head because there's no atmosphere which is a convenient way to mine rocket fuel and other needed components without having to transport or actually dig and also means the lack of weathering has left the surface of the moon covered in razor sharp dust that plays hell with everything.
However, Mars is covered in poison.
ok (Score:2)
Astronauts have to be prepared to die. People who sailed to America had to be prepared to die. Explorers in general have to be prepared to die. So what? It would be newsworthy if he said such people would be 100% safe (because that would mean either he had amazing technology, or he turned into a lying jerk).
Gold (Score:2)
There be gold in them there craters.
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perspective (Score:3)
Someone please take the Kool Aid away from this guy. His rocket just blew up recently and was asking for help in figuring out why...
And what have you done that is so amazing that we should care about your opinion? The guy has one rocket blow up and you proclaim him to be some kind of failure. Go out and find some new perspective. It seems you lost yours somewhere.
Re: (Score:3)
Or maybe some of the advances we make at the top of Maslow's pyramid will someday serve the ones struggling for the bottom of it... I mean, like 3D printing. Right now, it's still a novelty, in use for a very small fraction humans. Someday, maybe it's going to be the cheapest way to have a hamburger, and our African friend
Re: (Score:2)
Inscrutable behaviour (Score:3)
Someone please take the Kool Aid away from this guy. His rocket just blew up recently and was asking for help in figuring out why...
He was asking for evidence (recorded videos, audios, security camera footage), not help.
At this point I'm really wondering why people like you post this sort of thing. I mean, it's not like you have any insight into the situation.
It very much appears that you have an agenda (or an axe to grind), and chose to misrepresent the situation because you think it will add incrementally to whatever goals you have.
What are your goals? How does it benefit *you* to misrepresent what Musk is doing?
I'm constantly surpris
Re: (Score:2)
A fair point (Score:3)
Maybe he/she doesn't like people who make outrageous claims they can't back up. While I have no ax to grind on this particular claim, I can understand being irritated by these kinds of people.
Okay, that's fair.
But if someone is irritated by that sort of behaviour, it would seem (to me) to be more effective to attack the claims, instead of other things. And misrepresenting seems a bit dishonest, and ultimately ineffective.
Is it *really* that obvious that someone could
a) be irritated by Musk,
b) be driven by irritation to attack other things Musk does, and
c) be dishonest enough to misrepresent?
I agree that it could be a reason, but it's a stretch.
Is this motivation/behaviour really that obvious to
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe he/she doesn't like people who make outrageous claims they can't back up.
You know whats more outrageous than making unverified claims? Making claims known to be false.
The former is what Musk might be doing. The later is what the GP actually did.
Re: (Score:2)
God forbid anyone criticize a billionaire surrounded by yes men. He got lucky with PayPal and Tesla but asking people to die on Mars is a new one. So you died on Mars, how did that benefit anyone else? Elon Musk could shit on a cracker and you guys would pass it around like fine caviar.
Re:Inscrutable behaviour (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not "asking" anyone to do anything. It's a simple reality that if there was a mission to Mars coming up shortly and you passed a signup sheet around, and at the top of it was written in large letters "YOU WILL ALMOST CERTAINLY DIE AT SOME POINT DURING THIS TRIP", you'd still get thousands of signatures from people who are utterly thrilled at getting the chance and couldn't give a rat's arse about the risk.
Re: (Score:2)
Products are like sharks. If they aren't constantly moving forward, they're dead.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Plenty of people died colonizing the Americas. Didn't stop more coming and keep trying hoping they would make it a success.
Re: (Score:3)
You go first.
Challenge accepted: [cnbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
A few random examples I could think of might include:-
Ambient surface temperatures - and the need to power heating/cooling systems
Atmospheric pressure - and the implications that will have on the integrity of structures built by settlers [i.e. stop them popping]
The effect of the local gravity field on the long-term health of the settlers
Atmospheric protection from cosmic radiation
Availability of a
Re: (Score:2)
Add to that: a greater variety of minerals. Mining probably more fruitful. I think gravity is the biggest one though. Not just for health, but it will feel a bit more normal than the moon.
Re: (Score:3)
The big difference is that, on Earth, you need to be operating continuously over the entire distance, thanks to friction, traffic, weather, and other environmental hazards.
In space, you just set your trajectory and then go to sleep until you get to your destination. We do it all the time when sending probes around the system. There's basically nothing to hit - even when sending probes through the asteroid belt beyond Mars, the densest debris field in the solar system outside of Saturn's rings, and almost
Present fact based evidence or go away (Score:5, Insightful)
Musk is a Space Nutter.
You throw around the phrase "space nutter" as if that actually means something every time an article about Musk is posted. Let it go. If you want to make an evidence based case that going to Mars is not possible then fine. Ad-hominem attacks do not in any way bolster your case. They just make you look like a jerk.
There is no way ANYONE is going to Mars.
If you want to claim that people aren't going to be on Mars in the near future I would agree with you. Any such mission is going to take a while before it happens. If you are going to claim that it is categorically impossible that humans will ever set foot on Mars then you have no evidence to back you up. Present some actual and irrefutable evidence that putting humans on Mars is irreducibly impossible or shut up about it. So far your argument consists of calling anyone who is interested in solving the problem a "space nutter".
The trip alone would kill you with radiation.
And you of course have irrefutable proof not available to the rest of us that there is no possible way to mitigate that problem? Rhetorical question because of course since you don't and we know you don't. It's a known problem with numerous potential solutions. We aren't going to Mars tomorrow. If/when we do try to go it will be among the engineering challenges we face and one of the risks along the way. There is no evidence that it is a problem without any feasible solution given enough research and funding.
This guy is a scam artist and is trying to get taxpayer money to fund it, so he can siphon it off to pay for his other projects.
I'm not sure you know what the word means. Building at last count 4 successful and industry changing companies, three of which have nothing to do with space nor rely on any direct tax dollars, is a peculiar means of scamming people out of tax dollars. Furthermore most of the SpaceX mission list [spacex.com] has private companies as clients as of today so basically no tax dollars are at work there either. Additionally SpaceX is actually SAVING tax dollars by reducing the cost to orbit over what NASA can do themselves. You might want to actually use some facts in your argument at some point. They tend to help.
Re: (Score:3)
Was the first Arctic traversal a government mission?
How about the first summit of Mount Everest?
How about the first flight?
Nope.
Either private enterprise or not-for-profit groups.
Government does little in the way of firsts as they are bound by health and safety laws and sending people on fact-gathering missions is generally a waste of money. Technically the moon missions would come under military, even then, wouldn't they?
Don't wait for your government to be the first to cross the Atlantic or swim the Engl
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Being prepared for the possibility of death is a suicidal streak? So, every soldier and explorer in the history of the world has been suicidal?
I think it would be at least as honest to say that such people simply need to recognize a goal as being worth spending their life on, if necessary, rather than remaining in the comfortable delusion of immortality that many people wrap themselves in, some even unto their deathbed.