Well, there will probably be loads of science to do, which surely will be very exciting, and the simple knowledge of being the human who made the human race an interplanetary race must be incredibly inspiring. I am sure there are hundreds who would volunteer even if they only had food for a week and there was a 50% chance of dieing on impact, just for the possibility of being on the same page as Niel Armstrong in the history books.
Reminds me of part of the story in the Marathon game series: Martian colonists were abandoned and left to starve after it proved too difficult to support them using Earth's technology and resources. I hope that doesn't really happen. I also think this could be exciting.
Is this the criteria because someone who fits this description would hypothetically be late to 'break' or is it because there are no better criteria? I'm just interested to know if there's been any behavioral / psychological study proving that a.) people exist who fit this description and b.) they'd do well on such a mission over some other x criteria. It seems like anyone, no matter their makeup, will break under the parameters of living alone on Mars.Lansdorp said he's looking for people who are utterly dependable, good in groups and "at their best when things are at their worst."
Given the right pitch you can find enough people who are interested and crazy enough to do so for the chance to be a true human pioneer and to be a part of history. Is it crazy? Yes. But I think it's something we'll see, maybe not tomorrow, but one day.
We all die eventually. Might as well die some place no one else has.
Whomever chooses to be that first person, they would surely belong on this post: "Who was the first to ever _______?"
Another way to sell it would be as a gamble: "We'll send you life support while you're there, to the best of our ability, but fundamentally you'll be on your own. And if we can develop a rocket to bring you back, and deliver it to you, then you can come home. But we might never manage to do that: you might be stuck there already." It's not a new idea, of course. During the colonial era of many of the Western empires of yesteryear, this kind of "one-way ticket" was commonplace. When Britain sent prospectors to North America or convicts to Australia, none of them ever expected to come back again. It was a dangerous, one-way trip. The only difference is that the colonists on Earth rightly believed that the territory at the other end was capable of sustaining life, indefinitely. They took a big risk, but the reward was worth it - the chance at a new life, their own land, and a new home. The humans who go on a one-way trip to Mars will be completely dependent on Earth to support them: there's no way that they can live up there independently. At least: not yet.