5 ms·

that depends on how fast intelligence evolves. If most intelligences are still young (claim in this paper) then we are more likely to understand them. If we eve

by option 6y ago

that depends on how fast intelligence evolves. If most intelligences are still young (claim in this paper) then we are more likely to understand them. If we ever encounter something which had a billion years head start, then yeah, no way we would comprehend anything

rendall 6y ago
> "If most intelligences are still young (claim in this paper) then we are more likely to understand them" Would you mind expanding on that? Why would intelligences being young mean we are more likely to understand them?
- option 6y ago
  because we are super young ourselves, hence cognition gap between us and them are likely smaller.
  - rendall 6y ago
    "cognition gap" Yeah... this is why I suspect we may see signs of alien life, but just not know what we're looking at. You're not alone in thinking of intelligence as some kind of scalar quantity from bacteria to super beings, and if only we could find creatures in our range, we'll be able to communicate Embedded in our conception of intelligence is us. We measure intelligence by what we think is important. But creative approaches to fitness in radically different environments will be multidimensional and multivalent, extremely difficult to judge by our own standards I speculate that if we were to find aliens, we could never communicate beyond basic Skinnerian reward and punishment schema, if that, never mind prime numbers and such, no matter how sophisticated they are. We wouldn't even really be certain if we were witnessing intelligent behavior or autonomic processes, and neither could they. We can't even understand whales or dolphins, and those would be vastly easier to understand than anything without DNA, emergent from a completely different planet How could we possibly communicate with a civilization that communicates in the time scale of oaktrees, or are sessile, or communicate using flashes of microwaves in patterns we have no hope of even discerning?

by option 6y ago

rendall 6y ago

> "If most intelligences are still young (claim in this paper) then we are more likely to understand them" Would you mind expanding on that? Why would intelligences being young mean we are more likely to understand them?

option 6y ago
because we are super young ourselves, hence cognition gap between us and them are likely smaller.
- rendall 6y ago
  "cognition gap" Yeah... this is why I suspect we may see signs of alien life, but just not know what we're looking at. You're not alone in thinking of intelligence as some kind of scalar quantity from bacteria to super beings, and if only we could find creatures in our range, we'll be able to communicate Embedded in our conception of intelligence is us. We measure intelligence by what we think is important. But creative approaches to fitness in radically different environments will be multidimensional and multivalent, extremely difficult to judge by our own standards I speculate that if we were to find aliens, we could never communicate beyond basic Skinnerian reward and punishment schema, if that, never mind prime numbers and such, no matter how sophisticated they are. We wouldn't even really be certain if we were witnessing intelligent behavior or autonomic processes, and neither could they. We can't even understand whales or dolphins, and those would be vastly easier to understand than anything without DNA, emergent from a completely different planet How could we possibly communicate with a civilization that communicates in the time scale of oaktrees, or are sessile, or communicate using flashes of microwaves in patterns we have no hope of even discerning?