4 ms·
I prefer a Dark Forest strategy for approaching the universe. If anything, we should be thinking about how to emit less radiation that can be traced back to Ea
by andrewljohnson 8y ago
I prefer a Dark Forest strategy for approaching the universe.
If anything, we should be thinking about how to emit less radiation that can be traced back to Earth into space.
Best case: aliens send us technology via morse code.
Worst case: relativistic projectile from advanced civilization destroys Earth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Forest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Forest
- bgee 8y agowas thinking exactly this when I saw the title.
- seiferteric 8y agoAt this point I think I would rather take our chances with the aliens since we are going to destroy ourselves anyway.
- ALittleLight 8y agoFor being such a cynic about humanity you're awfully optimistic about aliens.
- tantalor 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favourite-longshot_bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favourite-longshot_bias
- gisely 8y agoI think there might be some reasons to be optimistic. Any civilization that might notice our signal and decide to interact with us has with us has existed much longer than our own civilization with high probability. Thus, there is more evidence of long-term stability in such a civilization than our own. With stability comes the potential for experience, with experience the potential for wisdom.
- ALittleLight 8y agoHow would you expect a society that is extremely stable would deal with an incohate civilization? I think it's at least plausible they would want to stifle potential problems in the cradle, so to speak.
- merpnderp 8y agoWhy would you believe they’d have our extremely temporary set or morals? Human empires have lasted for thousands of years and the one thing that binds 99% of human history is soul crushing enslavement of each other.
- AWildIdeaApp 8y agoAnything living the human exponential economic way in space, would be as visible to us as a von Neu-Mann-Probe.
- BrandoElFollito 8y agoOld movie spoilers ahead I watched a short movie (an episode from the Outer Limits? It was ~20 years ago) about some army rangers who stumble upon, track and ultimately kill an alien. When observing it closely afterwards, they realized it was an alien child sent to Earth on some kind of children camp. The primitive livings on that planet killed the child. The parents were not happy, blew up the camp (and our planet). So yes, I also favor the Dark Forest approach
- roywiggins 8y agoA relativistic kill shot would take out a lot more of Earth's biosphere than humans are likely to. If we kill ourselves, bacteria and cockroaches will live on. Not so much, if Earth is vaporized to make way for a hyperspace bypass.
- gotocake 8y agoOn the upside, the bypass is very splendid and worthwhile. Even ignoring something as extreme as the Dark Forest theory, it still seems like a questionable policy. A more conservative aim would be to want to maximize development time against the risk of discovery, ideally ultimately finding yourself in the role of observing without being observed. The history on our planet of first contact between disparate groups of humans should be illustrative. Even when people had good intentions, the unforeseen impacts could be enormous; I’m thinking of smallpox, and even the history of coexisting Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens. Maybe aliens are totally different, but it’s a hell of a thing do, assuming they would be more benevolent.
- medius 8y agoI just finished reading the series a few days ago. That's how I look at our universe now.
- flukus 8y agoThis seems to be based on the premise that alien civilizations can only find us if we broadcast and doesn't account for them sending out probes Even in that universe, we know they could easily send probes out to the galaxy and it would solve the whole "chain of suspicion" thing that makes destroying alien civilizations the best option.
- paulsutter 8y agoQuoting the link > Like hunters in a "dark forest" ... where any two civilizations cannot communicate well enough to relieve mistrust, making conflict inevitable. Therefore, it is in every civilization's best interest to preemptively strike and destroy any developing civilization before it can become a threat, but without revealing their own location, thus explaining the Fermi paradox.
- sebazzz 8y agoI think the explanation of the Fermi paradox is the fact that without a natural predator and add technically superior intelligence we populate the entire planet, while also having little care for the environment causing global warming which is then a problem handled too little too late (or even denied) by our politicians around the globe. This can eventually cause conflict, especially when food prices become too high. Besides that we are also are still fighting like toddlers (USA, Russia, China, Middle East) though it is hard to tell how serious those conflicts are. I think we are before the gap, that might also be because I'm pessimistic about the current state of the world. That said, if I'm wrong I would rather have any aliens find us. If you're advanced, you probably resolved various issues regarding limited resources, so why would you kill us as being primitive species?
- antepodius 8y agoWhy would you kill an ant? Would you care if one died while workers were building an orphanage?
- internet555 8y agoWhat was the Greek story (Plutarch? Idk) where some guy being hunted by some army captain crashes on some island and the local pseudo intellectual sophist says they need to kill him before the army captain comes or else they’ll be punished for either aiding him or letting him go. Then the army captain finds out they killed his target for no reason so he kills all of them for being corrupt idiots