3 ms·

Then they assumed that these civilizations retained [communication] capacity for about 100 years — again about as long as we've had it. Does that part of their

Then they assumed that these civilizations retained [communication] capacity for about 100 years — again about as long as we've had it. Does that part of their calculation seem awfully conservative?

yummypaint 6y ago
I wouldn't find it surprising if self destruction were a common occurence after intelligent life changes its environment enough to develop long range communication. Unless the technology develops at a comparable rate to evolution, there will always be a sharp discontinuity associated with industrialization that suddenly grants the ability to manipulate things on a planetary scale. The lifeforms will be placed in a completely novel situation without evolved mental hardware needed to see the danger. Just like how posting to facebook while driving doesn't feel dangerous in the way standing near the edge of a cliff does. I often wonder if this is where the great filter is located.
stkdump 6y ago
Given that we only have ourself to compare with and we can't look into the future, I think that is looking at it based on facts. Sure, we can identify this as one of the big unknowns in the calculation, but 100 years is what we know.
robbrown451 6y ago
That jumped out at me as well. It seems to me highly unlikely that humans will wipe themselves out in the next hundred years, and if they don't, even less likely beyond that. Maybe, but I doubt it.
pharke 6y ago
So their calculation is actually for the number of civilizations in the galaxy that are at exactly the same level of technological development that we are. Even assuming that some percentage of civilizations annihilate themselves beyond recovery there must still be a very long tail of ones that only do so at a later date as well as those that do not and those that recover at some later time.

3 ms·

Then they assumed that these civilizations retained [communication] capacity for about 100 years — again about as long as we've had it. Does that part of their

by rkagerer 6y ago

yummypaint 6y ago
I wouldn't find it surprising if self destruction were a common occurence after intelligent life changes its environment enough to develop long range communication. Unless the technology develops at a comparable rate to evolution, there will always be a sharp discontinuity associated with industrialization that suddenly grants the ability to manipulate things on a planetary scale. The lifeforms will be placed in a completely novel situation without evolved mental hardware needed to see the danger. Just like how posting to facebook while driving doesn't feel dangerous in the way standing near the edge of a cliff does. I often wonder if this is where the great filter is located.
stkdump 6y ago
Given that we only have ourself to compare with and we can't look into the future, I think that is looking at it based on facts. Sure, we can identify this as one of the big unknowns in the calculation, but 100 years is what we know.
robbrown451 6y ago
That jumped out at me as well. It seems to me highly unlikely that humans will wipe themselves out in the next hundred years, and if they don't, even less likely beyond that. Maybe, but I doubt it.
pharke 6y ago
So their calculation is actually for the number of civilizations in the galaxy that are at exactly the same level of technological development that we are. Even assuming that some percentage of civilizations annihilate themselves beyond recovery there must still be a very long tail of ones that only do so at a later date as well as those that do not and those that recover at some later time.