3 ms·

This was my first thought as well, and I think there are a number of possible reasons: - The tech is so far beyond our own that it would be unreasonable to cla

This was my first thought as well, and I think there are a number of possible reasons: - The tech is so far beyond our own that it would be unreasonable to claim it was developed in secret labs within plausible timeframes - They know it exists, but don’t know how it works, and there are growing concerns about adversaries beating us to that understanding - They believe adversaries have already figured things out or have surpassed our progress, and there is growing urgency to drum up public support for another space race type of research project

delecti 3y ago
That's an interesting thought experiment. Any technology that much more advanced than our own would require intermediary technologies before we could replicate it. If you took a car back to ancient Rome, they wouldn't be able to replicate it in one step even if they understood it, because you need sufficiently refined fuel, metallurgy, manufacturing precision, etc. The technological baseline needed to rollout any wildly advanced technology would necessarily lead to an incremental advancement before we got to the end result, and each step would be a plausibly "natural" advancement on current technology. There doesn't seem to be any particular place where a bunch of wild advancements are emerging from, which leads to a few likely possibilities: we haven't found alien technology; we have, but it's so advanced that we haven't cracked the surface yet; or we have, and have cracked the surface, and are replicating it, but they're doing a very good job keeping it secret. I don't think it's possible to keep the lid on something that big, and space is so big that I'm very inclined towards the first one.
- Sunspark 3y ago
  > If you took a car back to ancient Rome, they wouldn't be able to replicate it in one step even if they understood it, because you need sufficiently refined fuel, metallurgy, manufacturing precision, etc. A bicycle is an even better example. It is 100% understandable to a Roman just via looking and touching, but replicating a bicycle in Rome isn't as easy as it looks. The chain alone is a problem.
  - avar 3y ago
    Why would the chain be a problem? The Romans could make metal rods, rivets, and some of their finer metalwork is crafted with more precision than any bicycle chain. The real difference is that it would take an army of ancient craftsmen to make one bike. The real distinguishing factor with modernity is mass manufacturing and precision at scale. Even moreso income inequality and competition with slavery. Any roman who could afford a bicycle would rightly think it was rubbish compared to a horse. All this expense just to propel myself around?! The same goes for most modern conveniences. Even the best modern dishwasher is less efficient than a human slave doing the same task, if you're indifferent to the suffering of the slave, as the Romans were.
JPLeRouzic 3y ago
> "They believe adversaries have already figured things out or have surpassed our progress, and there is growing urgency to drum up public support for another space race type of research project" I would vote for this one, but this hypothesis doesn't need the ET part.

delecti 3y ago

That's an interesting thought experiment. Any technology that much more advanced than our own would require intermediary technologies before we could replicate it. If you took a car back to ancient Rome, they wouldn't be able to replicate it in one step even if they understood it, because you need sufficiently refined fuel, metallurgy, manufacturing precision, etc. The technological baseline needed to rollout any wildly advanced technology would necessarily lead to an incremental advancement before we got to the end result, and each step would be a plausibly "natural" advancement on current technology. There doesn't seem to be any particular place where a bunch of wild advancements are emerging from, which leads to a few likely possibilities: we haven't found alien technology; we have, but it's so advanced that we haven't cracked the surface yet; or we have, and have cracked the surface, and are replicating it, but they're doing a very good job keeping it secret. I don't think it's possible to keep the lid on something that big, and space is so big that I'm very inclined towards the first one.

Sunspark 3y ago
> If you took a car back to ancient Rome, they wouldn't be able to replicate it in one step even if they understood it, because you need sufficiently refined fuel, metallurgy, manufacturing precision, etc. A bicycle is an even better example. It is 100% understandable to a Roman just via looking and touching, but replicating a bicycle in Rome isn't as easy as it looks. The chain alone is a problem.
- avar 3y ago
  Why would the chain be a problem? The Romans could make metal rods, rivets, and some of their finer metalwork is crafted with more precision than any bicycle chain. The real difference is that it would take an army of ancient craftsmen to make one bike. The real distinguishing factor with modernity is mass manufacturing and precision at scale. Even moreso income inequality and competition with slavery. Any roman who could afford a bicycle would rightly think it was rubbish compared to a horse. All this expense just to propel myself around?! The same goes for most modern conveniences. Even the best modern dishwasher is less efficient than a human slave doing the same task, if you're indifferent to the suffering of the slave, as the Romans were.

JPLeRouzic 3y ago

> "They believe adversaries have already figured things out or have surpassed our progress, and there is growing urgency to drum up public support for another space race type of research project" I would vote for this one, but this hypothesis doesn't need the ET part.