4 ms·

I try to imagine humanity a thousand years from now, still bound to the same increasingly inhospitable planet, paying for the sins of our generations but nowher

by guelo 7y ago

I try to imagine humanity a thousand years from now, still bound to the same increasingly inhospitable planet, paying for the sins of our generations but nowhere to escape to. With probably an abandoned Mars or moon colony. Just nothing to explore. Even the boundaries of natural science would be mostly understood by that point. It would be so depressing. Our only salvation would be if we still have enough resources remaining for computers to run virtual worlds for us to explore. Basically video games, that's our best hope.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
ddingus 7y ago
Should those humans, along the way, do the work to exist here more harmoniously, the planet would not be increasingly inhospitable. Starting that work now is a huge economic opportunity too. There is no need to continue to squander resources. There are a lot of wants to do that. Understandable too. No judgement. We have a global priority conversation coming. The sooner the better.
zanny 7y ago
I don't think there is any chance we make it a thousand years without either reaching technological singularity or destroying ourselves. In the 80 years of transistor technology we went from string manipulation via pneumatic tubes to real time ray tracing. Though to be fair, both outcomes basically end biological human life - a technological singularity obsoletes carbon based biology and any rational successor species wouldn't keep living humans around when they can trivially archive our genetic code and reproduce us at will if ever needed - which is also then unlikely to happen. Its that or nuclear annihilation.
- 7thaccount 7y ago
  Paul Davies (head of SETI) has a fantastic book called "The Eerie Silence". It was the first time in years that I had read a good science book written for the layman that taught me not only a lot of new scientific ideas, history I didn't know about, and made me think about humanity in a new light. I really can't recommend it enough. Ok, so he makes an argument that made me put down the book (ok 17 year old me) and really ponder the statement. It was his belief that "all biological life is transistory". Of course we have no other intelligent life outside of earth to compare against, but it kind of makes sense in a completely unproven kind of way. A species develops as biological and eventually transcends to machine. At that point, you would be far more intelligent (maybe) and the only requirement for society would be lots and lots of energy. You would essentially be a mind floating around in infinite cyber space experiencing everything there is to experience. You could travel to the stars if you would like (no cryogenics or food necessary), but honestly...why would you want to? The book mostly sticks to scientific fact and covers a lot of SETI history, but there are many additional topics like this that are thought provoking. Some of my friends were horrified by this (end of biological humanity assuming it is ever possible), but to me...it is the most logical progression for humanity to become more than what it currently is. These flesh bodies cause us to die far too early and our brains can probably only be enhanced so much.
  - zanny 7y ago
    We are in effect the same tragedy that encompasses Octopoda. They are provably relatively intelligent and emotive creatures but have extremely short lifespans for their mental capacity and thus can never take real advantage of their learning ability. Humans are still that, just on an order of magnitude longer time scale. Its still hugely limited when compared to orders of magnitude larger time scales than that.
205guy 7y ago
I agree with the first half of your comment: humanity will be (mostly) Earth-bound and energy-bound, trying to deal with a fragile ecosystem in a humanitarian way. However, I disagree with the pessimism in the second half. To explore the ocean floors will take another 200 years, and probably another 100 for land before we even start. This will be driven by the need to decipher weather and climate, with currents of heat, salinity, nutrients, carbon exchange, and who knows what else through the atmosphere and oceans. Those seem like the priorities we'll need to solve climate stability, including associated tech for renewable energy and feeding whatever population we finally (hopefully) level out at (peacefully). And then I think we will still have many fascinating frontiers to explore, such as molecular biology, genetics, history, and the big one in my mind: psychology. We know so little about all the different ways our minds work and our studies are so primitive we think all people think alike. Just consider the huge difference between introverts and extroverts, and what it implies for people to be so fundamentally different--science isn't even considering these questions yet. In a thousand ears, things will just start to get interesting. To retreat into virtual worlds would be premature--though I have no doubt they will be explored in parallel.

by guelo 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

ddingus 7y ago

Should those humans, along the way, do the work to exist here more harmoniously, the planet would not be increasingly inhospitable. Starting that work now is a huge economic opportunity too. There is no need to continue to squander resources. There are a lot of wants to do that. Understandable too. No judgement. We have a global priority conversation coming. The sooner the better.

zanny 7y ago

I don't think there is any chance we make it a thousand years without either reaching technological singularity or destroying ourselves. In the 80 years of transistor technology we went from string manipulation via pneumatic tubes to real time ray tracing. Though to be fair, both outcomes basically end biological human life - a technological singularity obsoletes carbon based biology and any rational successor species wouldn't keep living humans around when they can trivially archive our genetic code and reproduce us at will if ever needed - which is also then unlikely to happen. Its that or nuclear annihilation.

7thaccount 7y ago
Paul Davies (head of SETI) has a fantastic book called "The Eerie Silence". It was the first time in years that I had read a good science book written for the layman that taught me not only a lot of new scientific ideas, history I didn't know about, and made me think about humanity in a new light. I really can't recommend it enough. Ok, so he makes an argument that made me put down the book (ok 17 year old me) and really ponder the statement. It was his belief that "all biological life is transistory". Of course we have no other intelligent life outside of earth to compare against, but it kind of makes sense in a completely unproven kind of way. A species develops as biological and eventually transcends to machine. At that point, you would be far more intelligent (maybe) and the only requirement for society would be lots and lots of energy. You would essentially be a mind floating around in infinite cyber space experiencing everything there is to experience. You could travel to the stars if you would like (no cryogenics or food necessary), but honestly...why would you want to? The book mostly sticks to scientific fact and covers a lot of SETI history, but there are many additional topics like this that are thought provoking. Some of my friends were horrified by this (end of biological humanity assuming it is ever possible), but to me...it is the most logical progression for humanity to become more than what it currently is. These flesh bodies cause us to die far too early and our brains can probably only be enhanced so much.
- zanny 7y ago
  We are in effect the same tragedy that encompasses Octopoda. They are provably relatively intelligent and emotive creatures but have extremely short lifespans for their mental capacity and thus can never take real advantage of their learning ability. Humans are still that, just on an order of magnitude longer time scale. Its still hugely limited when compared to orders of magnitude larger time scales than that.

205guy 7y ago

I agree with the first half of your comment: humanity will be (mostly) Earth-bound and energy-bound, trying to deal with a fragile ecosystem in a humanitarian way. However, I disagree with the pessimism in the second half. To explore the ocean floors will take another 200 years, and probably another 100 for land before we even start. This will be driven by the need to decipher weather and climate, with currents of heat, salinity, nutrients, carbon exchange, and who knows what else through the atmosphere and oceans. Those seem like the priorities we'll need to solve climate stability, including associated tech for renewable energy and feeding whatever population we finally (hopefully) level out at (peacefully). And then I think we will still have many fascinating frontiers to explore, such as molecular biology, genetics, history, and the big one in my mind: psychology. We know so little about all the different ways our minds work and our studies are so primitive we think all people think alike. Just consider the huge difference between introverts and extroverts, and what it implies for people to be so fundamentally different--science isn't even considering these questions yet. In a thousand ears, things will just start to get interesting. To retreat into virtual worlds would be premature--though I have no doubt they will be explored in parallel.