/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.2344539]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oY59wZdCDo0

>dem humans

[Anonymous No.2344550]

humanity was here. aliens are fags.

[Anonymous No.2344558]

>>2344539
>>2344550


Only 50 years of technological development between those two photographs.

Your mind is now blown.

[Anonymous No.2344567]

Our destiny is up there anons.

One day.

[Anonymous No.2344573]

Human eyes will one day witness this.

[Anonymous No.2344585]

[Anonymous No.2344587]

guys, have you ever heard the term "Humanity Fuck Yeah thread"?

[Anonymous No.2344611]

>humans
>humans everywhere

[Anonymous No.2344636]

>mfw aliens think we won't catch up to them

>mfw they'll learn not to fuck with us

[Anonymous No.2344642]

>>2344636

Evil federation is best federation.

[Anonymous No.2344647]

Glorious.
Oh sagan, why did you go?

[Anonymous No.2344653]

[Anonymous No.2344656]

Humanity, Fuck Yeah! ? On my /sci/?
...
words...
...
can't describe...
...
should have sent a poet.

[Anonymous No.2344664]

[Anonymous No.2344676]

/tg/ here.

We are here to help, having lots of experience in such matters.

[Anonymous No.2344681]

I use to look up to the stars and hope with all my heart that there was someone else up there.

I now look up to the stars and hope that there isn't. I look and and am amazed by the fact that it all belongs to US. We just have to reach out for it.

[Anonymous No.2344688]

>Mfw I watched that earlier today
I wish I my voice was as soothing as Carl's.

[Anonymous No.2344686]

We will never travel faster than light.
We will never achieve utopia.
We will only reach other star systems in forms that we would currently judge monstrous.
We, or our genetic code, will change and homo sapiens will fracture into many species.
We, as a civilization or culture, will be fractured due to the impossible to escape distances between star systems.

If we are lucky, humanity will simply not go extinct. We will not endure, we will simply not die. Our form, our mind, they will dissolve away in the ocean of time.
If we are lucky; our scarcely recognizable progenitors - be they biological, inorganic, or a mix of both - will have spread across the entire galaxy.

I feel like the average person would find such a future horrifying, but Sagan makes it sound miraculous.

There is beauty in the sharpest of thorns.

[Anonymous No.2344689]

>>2344686
Or Transhumanism and we're all just data without physical bodies.

[Anonymous No.2344692]

>>2344686


Cetacean pretending to be human detected.

go back to your ocean faggot.

[Anonymous No.2344694]

[Anonymous No.2344697]

>>2344676
/tg/ is like the home of H,FY!

It is all too uncommon here on /sci/. I would typically materialistic /sci/ poster would be highly susceptible to H,FY!.

[Anonymous No.2344701]

>>2344692
I'm a dolphin? I'm not following.

[-|- Reichsguard -|- !!Q3opPDaKzPo No.2344703]

>hope with all my heart that there was someone else up there.
>it all belongs to US. We just have to reach out for it.
These are not mutually exclusive.

[Anonymous No.2344705]

[Anonymous No.2344708]

>>2344686
First lets get this out of the way, Nuclear Pulse Propulsion can get us to the stars at a maximum velocity of 0.1C assuming that you have to decelerate again, if not you can reach 0.15C which will be important for latter. Also we will assume that there is no faster than light travel. Because that would open up another can of beans since humanity could convert an amount of mass equal to the observable universe into human flesh in 6,000 years if the 1994 population growth rate could be maintained. And it could be maintain if the superluminal travel would allow humans to access new resources fast enough.
So assuming that you could send out self replicating probes that would travel at an average velocity of 0.1C and that it would take each probe 100 years to make a 100 copies of itself each time that they entered a new stellar system, you could still visit every stellar in the Milky Way in under 1 million years. If theses probes carried humans or mechanized human descendants then our civilization could also spread as quickly.
If you programmed these probes to seek out life bearing exoplanets and crash into them an top speed, which for nuclear pulse propulsion is .15C if you burn all the fuel and don't plan on decelerating, you could purge all the life bearing planets in the galaxy and keep yourself safe from aliens forever. And if you programmed those same probes to accelerate toward any repeating, terminating radio signal and crash into the source body you could all target intelligent species. For that matter you could have them detonate there bomb stockpile before impact to scatter relativistic shrapnel cones at space habitats.

[Anonymous No.2344710]

>>2344703

...I like how you think

[Anonymous No.2344712]

>>2344701
Or an orca, or a porpoise. We're not picky.

[Anonymous No.2344713]

>>2344708
And that doesn't even account for the danger of other species colonizing everything and taking all your resources. Basically your only real option to keep yourself safe is to attack with berserker probes first and hope that you can get everybody before they launch their own. So you need at least a million year lead on your galactic war to ensure your own survival.
In a universe were superluminal travel cannot exist, any species that creates even the most primitive form of relativistic vehicle and self replicating machinery is an immediate and lethal threat to all other forms of life. Because of the rate at which intelligent life can spread, you pretty much have to attack all alien intelligences without provocation and with even knowing if there is anyone to attack. As previously stated probes with a maximum practical travel velocity of .1 C could visit every stellar system in the galaxy in as little as 250,000-1,000,000 years.
Now with speculative but still possible technology it could be done even faster. Even if we discount confined fusion as an energy medium for a reaction engine, hydrogen/antihydrogen reactions could still be used and we know they would work if there was enough antihydrogen. The solution to that being solar powered particle accelerators orbiting in the inner solar system. They would take in hydrogen from the solar wind and produce antihydrogen using abundant energy. A laser assisted launch could also increase the acceleration of outgoing ships of any type if a large solar powered array of lasers with an output greater than a terawatt was used.

[Anonymous No.2344715]

[Anonymous No.2344716]

>>2344708

I just came in my pants a little bit

[Anonymous No.2344717]

>>2344713
All this culminates in the ultimate plan for species survival, to completely disassemble the all the rocky planets of every stellar system we can get access to and use that mass to build Dyson Swarms of space habitats around the local stars. That way we can continue to survive around those stars until they burn out, which in the case of the lowest mass red dwarfs would be about 120 trillion years. The largest lofstrom loops possible with current engineering can lift 500 million tons a year and since you could only fit about 1000 on earth it would take nearly 10 million years to disassemble the planet. But it can be done only with proven technology, no super materials or new energy sources needed. You could power them using huge convection towers that contain liquid halite, which would be heated by the hot lithosphere you are uncovering. And of course the job would only get easier as the planet is taken apart: less gravity, more heat being radiated, more materials for building and maintaining the loops. That said you still have to use nuclear pulse propulsion to move the material for the first loop into orbit, about 2 million tons of it. But with nuclear pulse propulsion that is doable. We can conquer the cosmos with only what we know today, no soft scifi stuff needed. It will just take a very, very long time. Now of course you can't disassemble stars, or for that matter high mass objects like gas giants. But the earth sized planets or at least large portions of their lithospheres can be consumed. So any species that begins ruthlessly expanding could pull a Stalin and crush all the pacifist space hippies into oblivion with the weight of their own corpses if need be.

[Anonymous No.2344722]

>>2344550
66 years to be exact.Mind still successfully blown.

[Anonymous No.2344728]

>>2344717
Since we have not been hit with an rvk yet, Earth was not disassembled millions of years ago, and there are no Bracewell probes in the Solar System there are a few hypotheses I have regarding the state of intelligent life in the universe.
1. We are alone; there are no other communicative technological races. It could be that we are the first or they are all dead.
2. Others never developed technology. Essentially that would make them luddites, which means they will be good for target practice.
3. They aren't communicative and don't make rock'n weapons of slaughter on a galactic scale like we want to. So they are sissies and they will die by our hand. Even if they are a billion times as technologically advanced as we are, by the time that we meet them we will have disassembled the planetary bodies of several stellar systems and will outnumber them a trillion to one, effectively outnumbering them a thousand to one. Zerg Rush, Zerg Rush, Zerg Rush!

[Anonymous No.2344729]

[Anonymous No.2344735]

>>2344717
Why use nuclear pulse propulsion? I've always been partial to Bussard Ramscoops, can't they go at like .8c or something?

[Anonymous No.2344741]

>>2344728

another option: they are FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARaway, and the drones are on the way.

[Anonymous No.2344742]

>>2344735
They wouldn't work. It turns out there is less hydrogen in interstellar space than originally thought.

[Anonymous No.2344753]

>>2344741

>mfw FUCKING SCALE

[Anonymous No.2344750]

http://www.vimeo.com/15904733

[Anonymous No.2344759]

>>2344742
That's a damn shame.

[Anonymous No.2344760]

[Anonymous No.2344767]

>>2344753
/tg/ - Trolling General

[Anonymous No.2344768]

>>2344759
Indeed it is. Fortunately, it isn't the end of the world. Or maybe it is. Depends on information I don't have.

[Anonymous No.2344771]

[Anonymous No.2344781]

>>2344767

/tg/ - Troll Games

[Anonymous No.2344787]

asd

[Anonymous No.2344788]

[Anonymous No.2344791]

>>2344741
Possible but you'd think that two intelligent species wouldn't develop interstellar travel within a million years of each other. So the probes should already be here. Or they should have came at use earlier since they would have a presence in pretty much every other stellar sytem, assuming the aliens had at least a one million year lead time.

>>2344735
Won't really work, and internal confinment fusion is dubious at best. We know we could make an antimatter engine if we had the antihydrogen, and we can make a orion drive today so I say we have to work with what we got.

The only way to prevent the desemination of alien berserker probes is to control every stellar system in the galaxy so that we can destroy the probes while they are attempting to replicate. Since it is impossible for a stationary observer to determine the exact location of an object moving faster than .15C or greater there is not way to intercept a relativistic probe or kill vehicle. The only way to prevent alien conquest of space through von neumann machines is to do it first ourselves.

It only takes one bad apple to ruin an entire galaxy, and by God we must be that bad apple.

[Anonymous No.2344792]

[Anonymous No.2344796]

>>2344781
/tg/ - Tactical Genius

HURR

[Anonymous No.2344799]

>>2344708
>nuclear pulse propulsion
Even at those speeds it would take an entire human lifetime to reach the nearest star system. As such the ship would have to be a generation ship, which means it will be massive, which then means it will be expensive. Humanity COULD build such a ship, we COULD also terraform Mars with current technology. The problem is wether nor not humanity is willing to do it. A natural progression to other star systems by slowly colonizing the outer solar system before making a relatively short jump to objects orbiting nearby stars doesn't require a sudden use of all humanity's production capacity.

>self replicating probes
Physically possible, but well beyond the bounds of modern technology. So far in fact that one could scarcely use such a technology for an accurate prediction of the future. The fewer untested technologies you rely upon the more likely your prediction will be accurate. It's a promising technology, but hope all too often clouds the judgement of futurists.

>For that matter you could have them detonate there bomb stockpile before impact to scatter relativistic shrapnel cones at space habitats.
You're a jerk.

[Anonymous No.2344808]

>>2344713
If it life were likely to colonize the galaxy it would have happened long ago. No doubt intelligent life simply eradicates itself before it can gain a lasting foothold beyond its homeworld's gravitational influence.

[Anonymous No.2344815]

>>2344791

Let's not assume they had one million year. It's as likely as they had only one year advantage

[Anonymous No.2344828]

>>2344791

we can't know the exact location of that object. But we can predict the likelyness wher it is with high accuracy, and where will it be. After that we just need to seriously fuck up everything there and in the local systems.
Like a fucking code: Ragnarock

[Anonymous No.2344837]

[Anonymous No.2344844]

>>2344828
But WHY would you do it?

[Anonymous No.2344845]

[Anonymous No.2344847]

>>2344686
>We will never travel faster than light.
no needed

>We will never achieve utopia.
not wanted

>We will only reach other star systems in forms that we would currently judge monstrous.
>Implying johnny von neumann won't crack open a beer and watch a rerun of Married with Children after a hard day of bombarding an alien planet with his reaction engine during a breaking manuever.
Human descendants would be created with human prides and prejudices in mind. For all their intelligence posthumans will probably act the same. They will be petty, quick to anger, greedy, jealous sons of bitchs just like us.

>We, or our genetic code, will change and homo sapiens will fracture into many species.
>making shit up
There are only so many ways to make an efficient spaceship/human descendant. And species is kind of moot when your are mostly mechanical. But we should still hold life not derived from homos sapiens in derision to unite us through the only means that have ever proven effective, hatred. Burn the natural, eat the animal, kill the alien.

We, as a civilization or culture, will be fractured due to the impossible to escape distances between star systems.
And we will war with one another using relativistic weapons until the stars grow dim. Imokaywiththisjpg.

>If we are lucky, humanity will simply not go extinct. We will not endure, we will simply not die. Our form, our mind, they will dissolve away in the ocean of time.
That's is quiter talk.

> progenitors
Descendants

>I feel like the average person would find such a future horrifying, but Sagan makes it sound miraculous.
see pic

[Anonymous No.2344850]

>>2344844

surviving is a good enough answer I think

[Anonymous No.2344866]

[Anonymous No.2344872]

[Anonymous No.2344874]

[Anonymous No.2344881]

[Anonymous No.2344884]

>>2344850
1) Knowledge is important to survival. Wiping out everything before we even see it isn't exactly conducive to discovery. I mean this is fucking /sci/ here.
2) There is always a bigger fish. Your probes take out a world 100 light years away and some adjacent, larger interstellar civilization builds their own weapons to not only seek out and destroy every bastion that harbors your replicating weapons but also every human population.
3) Our first encounters with alien intelligent life will permanently shape the human zeitgeist. Stabbing to death the first alien species that wants to shake our hand is far from conducive to the passive mindset that our own increasingly large civilization will require to hold itself together. If we define ourselves by our aggression then we will forever be aggressive, and sooner or later it will be our own weapons wiping out humanity.

[Anonymous No.2344896]

>>2344847
ANGST FOR THE SAKE OF ANGST!

[Anonymous No.2344902]

So we make a fuckload of Von Newman machines with a big dose of FUCK YOU to the aliens and Dyson sphere the living shit out of every matter around ?

Sounds like a plan.

[Anonymous No.2344910]

>>2344884
there is only three thing that we can safely assume about an alien civilization


THEIR SURVIVAL WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR SURVIVAL.
If an alien species has to choose between them and us, they won't choose us. It is difficult to imagine a contrary case; species don't survive by being self-sacrificing.

WIMPS DON'T BECOME TOP DOGS.
No species makes it to the top by being passive. The species in charge of any given planet will be highly intelligent, alert, aggressive, and ruthless when necessary.

THEY WILL ASSUME THAT THE FIRST TWO LAWS APPLY TO US.


thats the typical Prisoner's dilemma. And it's proven in logic that the long way best chose is to be aggressive in this situation.

Thats of course option only when we are on the same or higher technological level. If not than the aliens will kill/enslave us

[Anonymous No.2344919]

everyone go watch pandorum. saw it this morning and it has the ultimate FUCK YEAH HUMANITY ending.

[Anonymous No.2344922]

>>2344902
It's pronounced DYSON SWARM. Dyson spheres are physically impossible. No substances exists that could hold it together.

You have little reason to wipe out other species. The chances of coming upon another interstellar civilization of a technological level that makes them both a threat and defeatable are very very low. More likely than not we will either come upon civilizations far outstripping our own and some that stone age.

[Anonymous No.2344929]

>>2344910
Hence why nobody with any actual intelligence tries to communicate. Except us. Whoop dee shit. Might as well paint a huge target on our backs.

[Anonymous No.2344938]

>>2344884
1.
Any knowledge to be gained from extraterrestrial intelligences can be more easily and quickly be found if we consume as much mass as possible and use it for computing. A dyson swarm with a mass of the Earth could discover more in one year than an alien civilization that lives in balance with it's biosphere could in a hundred. And if we consume stellar systems worth of mass we could quickly outstrip any information we could gleen from aliens.

2.
If there is already a civilization that advanced they're probes probably would have reached us by now, since they should be space fairing for several million years already. And assuming they are not and have restricted themselves to only a few stellar systems they are doomed. If the probes have already traveled a hundred thousand light years they are already all over the galaxy and the humans and their probes have access to vast stores of resources. And with so may stellar systems under their control the alien probes could be hampered as they attempt to replicate. Even a species far more advanced than the humans would be wore away like stone under the endless waves of human rvks and probes. And how can we trust another civilization to be insular instead of imperialist? The only way to ensure that we are not wiped out is to attack first without provocation.

[Anonymous No.2344939]

>>2344919
Shit plot, shit movie most of the time... but damn, that ending made everything worth it.

[Anonymous No.2344945]

>>2344884
3.
I see no problem with an aggressive humanity fighting itself for all time. With major interstellar empire occasionally attacking with rvks. The whole point of turning all the mass of a stellar system into dyson swarms is to protect ourselves from rvks. This dilute cloud of habitats would suffer minimal losses to any single volley of rvks from a hostile nieghbor allowing use to reciprocate in kind. And if an rvk kills a few tens of billion every once and while either due to overt aggression or an ancient weapon gone rouge, what of it. What are a few billion in a stellar systems hundreds of trillions strong? It would be no more tragic than an earthquake is today. Such things are merely the cost of species survival in a hostile universe.

[Anonymous No.2344955]

>If there is already a civilization that advanced they're probes probably would have reached us by now, since they should be space fairing for several million years already.

how about no? you cant prove that they will be million years ahed of us. Neither that we are ahed of them. We simply don't know that, but stating an assumption like it is a fact is just plain retard

[Anonymous No.2344964]

>>2344922
Actually since we have the technology to travel to other stars today we really should be seeing evidence of von neumann probes and dyson swarms but we aren't. Given the timescales involved it seems like we may be the first. Since if there are more advanced species would should have already seen evidence of them.

inb4 space is big
Because that is the standard response for fucktards that don't understand how fast intelligent life can spread using even the lowest relativistic speeds <0.12C.

[Anonymous No.2344979]

>>2344955
What are the chances of two species developing interstellar space travel within a million years of each other? Is it less than the chances of two species developing interstellar space travel within more than a million years of each other?

The answer is yes. It is more likely that they would be a million years or more older than human civilization, yet we do not see evidence of their existence we would expect. So while we cannot discount the existence of a species slightly less or more primitive than ourselves but not spread galaxy wide yet it is still pretty unlikely.

[Anonymous No.2344985]

>>2344910
>THEIR SURVIVAL WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR SURVIVAL.
And vice versa, but you have made no attempt to argue why cohabitation is impossible. In fact it could be mutually beneficial. Nations don't eradicate other nations when they believe they can merely get away with it. Live and let live. We may very well integrate both cultures to an extent. There is strength in diversity. If something happens that leads to the inevitable demise of all our direct descendants be they genetic decedents or our creations that alien civilization, having different traits, may very well live on. Because we would have interacted with them we will live on through them (a la TNG's The Inner Light).

>No species makes it to the top by being passive.
Survival of the fittest doesn't apply when cooperation makes the whole stronger. Because both organisms (organisms in this case refers to each respective species/civilization) has the ability to communicate, they have the ability to cooperate. Look at the very development of humanity. We went from single cells, to colonies of cells working together, to social animals working together, to tribes, to villages, to city-states, to nations, and then to the current closely knit groups of nations. A simpleton may not be able to argue against the flawed logic of your Nazi-esque galactic scale eugenics with anything other than argument from morality, but from a practical standpoint if the Nazi's had eradicated every subgroup of homo spaiens save their own then humanity would be highly susceptible to disease. Different ways of thinking within different cultures may expedite the solution of certain problems.

[Anonymous No.2344988]

>>2344896
>Angst

[Anonymous No.2344989]

>>2344964

but you know, thing in the mirror is light years away. So what we see is effectively the past there. So maybe there are thing out there on the other and of the galaxy. Or in another galaxy. But both of us don't know about each other because of the "lag"

[Anonymous No.2344990]

>>2344985
(continued)
>And it's proven in logic that the long way best chose is to be aggressive in this situation.
>this situation
I don't believe you actually realize what "this situation" is. The most likley form of an alien civilization we will come across is one that is either stone age or far beyond our own. The likelihood of finding a civilization that is strong enough to pose a threat but weak enough to be won against is virtually nonexistent.

[Anonymous No.2345002]

all you faggots going on about war scare me. thankfully you will be extinct soon enough. the reality is closer to >>2344705, but even that isn't exactly right. by the time we meet anyone we will be damn near identical to them. space is the same all over, and all intelligent life will come to mostly the same conclusions about the best way to do things. when different species meet they will nearly instant mash up together and become one entity. and organic life will never leave it's solar system.

[Anonymous No.2345009]

>>2344988
>angst
>insecurity
>teenage angst is some times used to describe the adolescent predisposition towards non-conformism, i.e. resisting commonly held beliefs
>Carl Sagan being awesome is a commonly held belief
Maybe you don't know what it means.

SAGE because of off topic.

[Anonymous No.2345012]

>>2344964
>Given the timescales involved it seems like we may be the first.
Given the timescales it is unlikely we are the first. Other civilizations have likely wiped themselves out with nuclear or biological weapons or used up their world's resources before gaining a foothold in space.

[Anonymous No.2345019]

/tg/ here. Get over youre idiocy and get to building the shit we need to find out what is true and what isn't.

Also?
HFY is pretty awesome

[Anonymous No.2345031]

>>2344955
What? It is very likely they will be millions of years ahead of us. The universe has been around for 13.7 billion years. The chance of two civilizations becoming interstellar within one thousand years of each other is damn near nonexistent.

[Scia No.2345034]

Take heart fellow humans the time of the privatization of space is upon us.

They already plan the colonization of other worlds.

http://www.space.com/8217-private-moon-bases-hot-idea-space-pioneer.html

We will spread to the moon then to mars

then to moons of Jupiter and Saturn

to the kuiper belt

and then to the stars

Within our lifetimes we will see the transition between humanity living only on earth to living on the moon and then on mars


We live at the tipping point the most important point in human history

Take heart in that

[Anonymous No.2345040]

>>2344985
>Nations don't eradicate other nations when they believe they can merely get away with it.

History you need to fucking read it.


>There is strength in diversity
This is too broad a statement. There can be strength in diversity so long as the diverse traits are something that can be selected for. But if the traits were just diseases with no beneficial side effects, or stupidity, or physical weakness; these traits would not enhance survival of the hole. Also at this point in the development of a species genetic and technological augmentation would allow them to adapt faster than any process of natural selection of traits would allow. Evolution is obsolete. It is too slow for our needs therefore the diversity thing makes little difference. Especially to machines which cannot suffer disease.

>saying aliens and humans can coexist
They evolved from completely different bacteria with alien biochemistries, aliens physiologies, and alien behaviors. Their brains would literally be constructed differently than our own. There would be no thoughts like our thoughts in their heads, no feelings like our feelings in their hearts. Alien minds are alien. We would be monsters to one another. And given that only aggressive species are likely to spread to other stars, now you have two aggressive alien beings coming into conflict for resources. War is inevitable. Just as animals are below moral consideration. Aliens are above it. Morality does not apply to interspecies conflict, only survival matters.

And more to the point lets say the first species you meet are nice space hippies and you join hands and sing coumbya. All is right with the universe.

1,500,000 years latter
Berserker probes, berserker probes everywhere. I guess somebody somewhere int he galaxy was not friendly. Now your Space Federation is extinct by the hand of vicious species that had the guts to survive.

[Anonymous No.2345044]

>>2345019
How about WE play board games and YOU discover the secrets of the universe... I'm getting fed up with being the only one doing work on this gawdam site!

[Anonymous No.2345059]

>>2345044

then exterminatus fleet for everyone!

[Anonymous No.2345062]

>>2345012
First space going civilization. Whether the there never where others or they never figured out MAD is a conjecture.

We could get out there today. We are empire waiting to be born, if the fucking wimps would ignore SALTII and the Outer Space Treaty and just use project orion.

[Anonymous No.2345064]

Warmongers, warmongers everywhere.

[Anonymous No.2345084]

>>2345064

[Anonymous No.2345138]

>>2345040
>history...
I think you misconstruing war as erradication. We aren't talking about conflict between two parties on even footing over resouces. We are talking about one very powerful side erradicating a much weaker side simply because of the remote chance of that then weak culture my rise up to overwhelm the then stronger culture. It doesn't make sense. Europe dominated other cultures during colonial times, but they didn't systematically eradicate them for the ridiculous reasons you are proposing. Native Americans were nearly eradicated but that was mostly due to disease (have you seen the numbers of N. and S. Americans that died to disease because of European explorers? It's fucking ridiculous? Like 80-90% of a population of tens of millions).

Let's just ignore the matter and move on to the more interesting discussion topics.

>But if the traits were just diseases with no beneficial side effects, or stupidity, or physical weakness
Diversity isn't as simple as a set of traits that are easily rated on a spectrum. There are complex reasons why one would be weak versus strong, smart versus dumb. Take Africans, they have a gene that makes them more susceptible to AIDS, but it turns out that same gene makes them resistant against malaria then peoples without the gene. We may come across an intelligent alien species that uses copper in their blood instead of iron despite iron being a more efficient means of transporting oxygen. But what if a plague spreads that only effects organisms with iron blood?

The ENTIRE reason strength is found in diversity is because we can't predict every problem we might come across. As such, we can judge what differences will later turn out beneficial or not. So it is not I who is oversimplifying the term diversity. It is your characterization of diversity as either smart or dumb, strong or weak that is oversimplifying it.

tl;dr Diversity means difference, and we can't know what differences will be beneficial or not.

[Anonymous No.2345169]

>>2345040
>differences between species
Just because I can't share a fucking beer with a Vegan doesn't mean the next logical step is to bludgeon him to death. If communication is possible than coexistence is possible barring some ludicrous sci-fi plot device like the alien species brain waves instantly kill humans and cannot be worked around. Just because I can't think like a dog doesn't mean developing a fondness towards my dogs presence is impossible... and that is all friendship is. And friendship is leaps and bounds more to ask then simple coexistence. Even if no alien lived on a human world or vice versa, coexistence is possible and mere communication along with coexistence would benefit both sides.

[Anonymous No.2345183]

>>2345138
(self-correction)
we CAN'T judge whether a different trait will be beneficial or not*

[Anonymous No.2345228]

>>2345138

>Africans have a gene that makes them more susceptible to AIDS

Thought you could just slip that by us? Care to source that?

[Anonymous No.2345249]

> AIDS, but it turns out that same gene makes them resistant against malaria then peoples without the gene

You're thinking of sickle cell trait, that has nothing to do with aids. And that is also why I said "diseases with no beneficial side effects".

>We may come across an intelligent alien species that uses copper in their blood instead of iron despite iron being a more efficient means of transporting oxygen. But what if a plague spreads that only effects organisms with iron blood?
And this matters why? You can't interbreed with aliens so your children can get copper blood. They may not even use DNA, but rather a protein based genetic material, making introduction of their traits into our genome impossible. And we already know organism more closely related to use that have copper blood, cephalopods. Also cooper blood is not as efficient as iron blood at the temperatures we live in. And it would be easier just to become bloodless robots than introduce alien genes anyway.

Mechanical augmentation is the way to go, and eliminates any desire to keep aliens for the dubious value of their "diversity".

[Anonymous No.2345278]

>>2345228
My google search turned up many results. I'm looking for a concise article that talks about both, but I bet searching "susceptibility malaria AIDS african" yourself will give you the results you require in no time at all.

[Anonymous No.2345282]

>I think you misconstruing war as erradication.
The Romans, Greeks, Goths, Indians, Muscovy era Russians, Mongols, 1st/3rd dynasty Chinese, USA, Acadians, Persians, Austria, Nubia, Aztec Triple Alliance, and Iriquous Confederation, all are historyically documented as wiping out tribes to the last man when they stood in there way. And many other have scattered tribes so much that they broke down and were absorbed into other populations.

Genocide is a human tradition, Xenocide is a new tradition waiting to be born.

[Anonymous No.2345323]

>>2345282
>>2345282
Early human tribal conflict did not consist of eliminating the opposing faction's ability to wage war, by defeating them in armed combat like modern war, but rather genociding helpless non-combatants. Kill their women and children and in a generation there will be no one to fight

[Anonymous No.2345325]

Oh god, did that berzerker drone guy fag up this thread with his copy pasta again? What the hell does he do, wait on /sci/ all day?

[Anonymous No.2345334]

>>2345249
>You can't interbreed with aliens so your children can get copper blood.
Stop thinking solely on a biological level. Your effect on the universe is what you would want to protect, not solely the product of you fucking Orion slave girls.

Save for our instinctive urges that just so happen to coincide with protecting our offspring, why not simply ignore the consequences of your actions beyond the effects that may affect your happiness? Why live for anything aside from pleasure? The most all encompassing goal for why one would give a damn about what goes on after their death is the want for your existence to mean something, for it to have mattered that you lived at all. You live on through your boot mark on the universe. Children are the easiest and arguably the best way to carry on as much of what makes you you into the future, not just genetically but also what you impart upon them by raising them. But what if you were sterile? It is just your effect on society that will live on.

Assuming that it is better to have an effect on the universe rather than to have the universe go on as if you had never existed at all then, it is better if humanity gets wiped out AFTER it has influenced alien cultures than before (have you seen the TNG episode The Inner Light?).

Coexisting and communicating with alien civilizations is an insurance plan for the continued survival of our legacy.

Should you argue that one's effect past death is not a reasonable goal then one might as well argue against why one would think children are so damn important.

[Anonymous No.2345347]

>>2345325
Don't worry, he fucks up /tg/ threads too. Nobody asks for it but whenever the thread comes up he pastes the entire thing like a derange man's wannabe meme.

[Anonymous No.2345356]

>>2345334
There is no logic in considering a child as your legacy if you plan on dying anyway. You won't be remembered after a few generations and everything you've ever done will be forgotten by everyone. Even famous people are slowly forgotten by more and more people, and in a long enough timespan it becomes pointless.

Clinical immortality is the way to go. Your descants are merely you pointlessly trying to justify instincts.

Ideally, I think it would be best to spread like gnats AND communicate peacefully with aliens, especially if we become mechanical, since that would mean we have nothing to fear.

There's no POINT in disassembling the entire galaxy for any reason whatsoever, especially if you're mechanical instead of biomechanical.

[Anonymous No.2345367]

>>2345323
Unfortunatley no. The display war most often seen by outside observers is only one kind of tribal war. The rest consists of abuses and night raids with the intention of killing all the adult males and capturing females and very young children to be raised in a the conquering tribe. Almost all Algonquin, Iriquios, Crow, and and Eastern Inuit practiced and recorded this type of warfare with pride.

And city states regularly burnt rivals to the ground if they could.

Not all war is genocide, but some it of is.

[Anonymous No.2345374]

>>2345282
>when they stood in there way
When they were a threat or when there were resources to gain you mean. And several of your examples are false. Romans, Greeks, the Mongols, the USA, Persians, Iroquois CONFEDERATION, and many unlisted powers such as Spain, England, France and Japan all were more about domination or integration rather than eradication.


Ironically every last one of those powers only became powerful because the ancestors of each decides to set aside differences and join forces in one form or another (save maybe the Mongols and the Persians, but I know less about them).

If humans aren't define by fighting, we are simply defined by DOING. We get shit done. Sometimes violence is the best course of action given some set of predefined goals. Sometimes it isn't. Your KILL KILL KILL mentality is illogical. There are benefits to coexistence and deteriments to the shoot first asked questions later mentality that you refuse to acknowledge.

It's all moot too because the chances of an alien civilization being in that power sweet spot where they are weak enough to be fightable and strong enough to be a threat is too small to be discussed. For example, in last million years since humanity evolved or the last 10,000 years since the dawn of civilization, take anyon on group of humans from any point in history and pit them against some other random group of humans from another period in history. The chances of it being an even playing field are next to nil. More likely than not humanity (if we make it to this step) will either meet up with a much older civilization or one that is in the stone age.

[Anonymous No.2345380]

>>2345367
But you forget that just as often they would conquer a country to subjugate people and use them for income or a buffer. Look at India or China vs. British Empire.

[Anonymous No.2345390]

>>2345356
I believe this discussion is over.

Have fun with your life goal of immortality... I hope that works out for you. Your arbitrary goal of living forever sounds a little less achievable then mine of simply having an effect on the universe. But who knows, maybe we will be laughing about this 10,000 years from now in Orion girl strip bar in the Vega system.

[Anonymous No.2345394]

>>2345374
>If humans aren't define by fighting
I meant,
>Humans aren't defined by fighting

[Anonymous No.2345436]

>>2345390
Indeed. Immortality technology is going up, though I doubt anyone would live forever it's still a goal.

As for children having an effect on the universe... I guess that's possible/negligible with how everyone is already practically related anyway. It doesn't matter in the long-run, since everyone is related to you genetically to a degree that would matter in such a way that one of your 100th generation descendants doing something would be just as related as some random nobody barely related to you 100 generations ago managing to not get eaten by wolves.

[Anonymous No.2345595]

>>2344985
>>2345002
Liberal fucktards.

Not understanding game theory, math, human nature or any sort of logic.
Your bullshit hippie ideology only exists because you've been able to live in leisure because OUR civilization came on top because we were more ruthless and more intelligent than others.
Humans will ALWAYS be at war

[Anonymous No.2345837]

>>2345595
If we ever reach post-scarcity it would certainly change the paradigm for the motivation of wars, though. Wars would continue, but would almost be fueled purely through ideological and other philosophical means.

[Anonymous No.2346090]

Aliens would not likely be more different from us than we are from other species on this planet with whom our last common ancestor dates from before the Cambrian explosion: arthropods, mollusks, echinoderms... Although they would likely have very different chemistry, they would have to solve the same fundamental structural problems as any creature that has to find food, protect itself and reproduce. Our last common ancestor with these non-closely-related phyla was so simple and undeveloped that most complex systems (lungs, brain, kidney, skin etc) developed separately, the same as it would among alien species with no common ancestry.

[Anonymous No.2346171]

>>2346090
If they were technologically advanced alien life, they'd also need a highly developed capacity for tool use.

[Anonymous No.2347298]

Problem, Frank Drake?

[fa/tg/uy No.2347380]

Wow, /sci/. You really fucked up this thread.

[Anonymous No.2347498]

>>2344938
>>2344910
>>2344945
>>2345040
>>2345040
>>2345595
Hey. Hey.

You.

Take your hand off your dick for a second, I wanna say something.

You're not relevant.

You haven't been relevant since the Berlin Wall came down and that's starting to look like a loooong time ago.

Remember how Game Theory said the best possible choice in the Cold War was to launch lots of lovely nukes and feel maybe a little guilty?

Remember how that didn't happen?

Remember how the best option in the prisoner's dilemma is to sell out? Remember how people cooperate anyway, more often than you'd think?

Humanity: Fuck Yeah isn't entirely a dick-waving contest, and no one cares to see yours right now. Put your mighty three inches away and think about this.

We're not dead. The aliens haven't killed us yet. Maybe someday they will, but "kill them first" is a 10-year-old's solution to that.

What would /sci/ rather have? An unmarked grave for we pink monkeys, spinning third from Sol? Or an epitaph a galaxy large, written in seared planets orbitting dying stars, a "We were here, and we didn't want anyone else to be either"?

Yeah, they both suck. How about we spend those resources trying to move Neptune into one of Jupiter's stable Lagrange points instead? That'd be cool. We could send out self-replicating postcards of it.

'Cause the only way to eliminate every threat to yourself is to be everyone's best friend. Anyone with me, or do you prefer wanking over imagined interferometry images of the Acturian Hyperpuppies' planetary crust melting?

[Anonymous No.2347536]

>>2347498
>Remember how Game Theory said the best possible choice in the Cold War was to launch lots of lovely nukes and feel maybe a little guilty?

Best move is to not play, err'body knows that.

[Anonymous No.2347559]

>>2347498

Arguing with the likes of him isn't going to get you anywhere. Trust me, /tg/ has been dealing with these shitheads for years.

[Anonymous No.2347571]

>>2347498
Unfortunately your comparison is a little off.

If you are comparing Cold War Game Theory to the relativistic Prisoners Dilemma you missed one crucial point. ICBMs do not behave as models for rvks.

ICBM:
Launches are detectable allowing for a immediate counter attack.
The launch points and country of origin of the ICBMs are know allowing for a retaliatory strike.
Communication is possible between the hostile parties allowing for bluffs, threats, and assurances to be exchanged.
All this facilitates MAD.

Self Replicating RVKs
Not detectable until that impact their targets.
Launch point my be found if you are very lucky, but if the source of the RVKs is a Von Neumann probe then the ultimate source of the hostile action remains completely unknown.
Since the hostile party is unknown and interstellar distances would make discourse impossible away, there is no way to establish a dialog to exchange threats or make peace.
This makes MAD impossible to establish.

The only highly unlikely way to establish MAD would be to have a human presence in every stellar system so that everyone was constantly surrounded by the threat and hostile action would result in retaliation of all neighbors, and even that would be almost impossible to set up given the time delay involved with lightspeed communications.


Relativistic War != Cold War
It is a new kind of war

[Anonymous No.2347572]

>>2347559
He hasn't retorded yet, and it's been a while since anyone posted in this thread so I guess nigga won.

[Anonymous No.2347591]

>>2345380
Well it's not like the British Empire could wipe out or even conquer China at the time. It's hard to do genocide when you don't the the resources. But there was some South African Tribes that got exterminated in the Boer War.

Basically if you can wipe them out there is a 50/50 chance you will. If you can't then you won't. It's not even really a racial thing as much as a "eliminate the foe for all time" thing. People have long memories when it comes to war and vendettas can be carried for generations until an old foe is in a position of weakness.

[Anonymous No.2347609]

>>2347572
Aww, looks like you jinxed it but like. BACKWARDS in time, man.

>>2347571
>implying I was ever even arguing
Nope, just here to ad hominem. And sometimes really dumb ideas.

Don't worry, in my pretend-future people like you will have virtual realities to live in, with all the (fakey fake) dead aliens your cold robot heart and hard psychopath cock could ever want.

[Anonymous No.2347635]

>>2347609
Um, buddy I wasn't here yesterday I just thought the thread was interesting.

>>2347609
>virtual realities for psychopaths
Who are you, Ian Banks? I think that's something that nice, self indulgent, passive, or peaceable guys don't get about assholes, workaholics, and psychos. It's not about the experience of killing and conquest. It's about the end product. If the war isn't real then what fun is that? It's just one of the reasons I don't really play video games or even any games for that matter.

[Anonymous No.2347658]

>>2347635
What is more real? A simulated world ran on the exact same physical laws as reality to which your senses are connected, or maybe in which you as a being exist (just as a pattern within that emulated universe) or a real "physical" universe. There should be not difference there. You could make a claim relating to consciousness if you hold certain types of beliefs, but if the actual senses of the person are connected to the simulated world, while the "brain" is outside that world would make that argument invalid. When you can't distinguish reality from simulation and when you can't influence reality from within the simulation, the simulation IS your reality.

tl;dr: information is just information. for all practical purposes, simulated universes would just be as real as the physical one. It could even be argued that beings within it are probably conscious and you subjecting them to certain things may even be unethical.

[Anonymous No.2347670]

>hurr durr history
Liberal arts bullshit.

[Anonymous No.2347690]

> it will not be we that would reach alpha centauri. It would be a species very like us

agreed.

[Anonymous No.2347691]

Pic is now oddly related.

[Anonymous No.2347696]

>>2347658
That's a bunch of philosopical garbage.

The difference between the simulated and physical worlds are this. In the physical world I can go up to the computer you are plugged into and smash it with a hammer, destroying the simulated world. Or plunge a knife into your catatonic body, killing you in you simulated world, assuming you are not just data in the simulation in which case the smashy smashy plan would work. But while in your simulated world you cannot effect me in the physical world. Essentially the physical existing in the physical world offers more power and a better chance to continue living.

[Anonymous No.2347710]

>>2347635
Banks is like waaaay better at this than me, he doesn't even have to duplicate vowels to pad stuff out. And really all that matters to anyone is
Oh hey wait wasn't one of the books called Matter? Double meaning?
sense data, what you see and know and believe. Means, ends, it's all the same to a simulation.

Shit, let's be serious. You're right, there isn't any comparison between ICBMs and RKVs. But there's a comparison between people who wish to use them, and that's what's important here. Because you can't answer RKV-Guy's point with logic; his conclusions follow from his premises, and most of his premises are sound (or in the case of "humanity > aliens," are very hard to convince people otherwise of).

There's a false dichotomy in "kill or be killed," but arguing that gets you nowhere. So you just have to laugh at the people who really really BELIEVE in that dichotomy, who are convinced that plus ca change, plus c'est ca meme chose. Certain that their morality is still up to date.

And wait for the zeitgeist to run them over and leave them bitter and alone and wishing the world weren't so awesome. Pic related.

[Anonymous No.2347721]

>>2347691
Okay, I've seen to many of those comics around here now. What's the name of it?

[Inurdaes !V1sPhobos. No.2347736]

>>2347721
http://www.smbc-comics.com/

[Anonymous No.2347767]

>>2347691
haha, nice

[Anonymous No.2347774]

>>2347691
Uses the word sentience=able to feel and experience.
Rather than sapience=able to think and have an sense of self.

Then tries to couch things he says as intelligent.

Author confirmed for fucktard.

[Anonymous No.2347779]

>>2347774
You fail to realise that making robot that feel is harder than making robot that think

[Anonymous No.2347795]

[Anonymous No.2347796]

>>2347774
You fail to realize that the author is writing for an audience and might use a common misconception not to confuse everyone.

[Anonymous No.2347811]

>>>2347710
>false dichotomy in "kill or be killed"

Is it really? In a thousand years any future asshole could make one of these berserker things and send it out. He could just be mining asteroids one day and go "shit aliens! must launch killer probe". Or some cabal of xenopobes could make one and launch it, and if no one figures it out until it's to far gone to interdict with a laser(distance to great for the beam to remain collated) or going to fast then the cat is out of the bag. The probe could go anywhere and is almost impossible to track down. And if a few wacky humans could do that then a few wacky aliens could too.

Frankly I expect humans to be doing this instead of probes since we'd practically be the same thing by the time we'd want to start this xenocide plan. Some human/ship enters a system that it wants to colonize and detects aliens. It then fires it's reaction engine at them as it decelerates. But maybe probes have their place too.

[Anonymous No.2347821]

>>2347796
Stupidity and imprecise diction don't deserve excuses.

"People is stupid so I'll dumb down my one writing so as not to confuse them derpty derp do."

[Anonymous No.2347832]

>>2347779
"feeling" just means being able to interpolate physical sensations like sight or touch. They already have robots that can do that.

Even flatworms are sentient for fucks sake.

[Anonymous No.2347838]

>>2347696
Of course, that's something everyone would understand, however I just ignore these things in my example, I can just assume a peaceful civilization that won't just destroy an emulated reality, or whatever is maintaining the emulated reality is already in control of huge amounts of matter (as they would need to be, to do a simulation of that scale), possibility the size of galaxies and their interest would just be to perpetuate this emulated reality. In the end, life (and reality) will come to an end for a being living in the universe (simulated or real), the only difference is in the amount of time one can survive. In the real universe, you could theoretically just run around and gather energy from stars until you run out, and you will run out if the universe is open (not closed). If it's closed, you'll still die in the crunch.
I still see no difference except in the size of the simulated world and the amount of time an organism can survive within them. As far as their phenomenal experience will be concerned, simulated and real "reality" would give the same kinds of experiences.

[Anonymous No.2347869]

>>2347811
Yeah, true, but I don't care and nor should anyone else. Secret cabals of lunatics trying to destroy the world/system/galaxy? Yeah, and what if they decide to do it to us? Wouldn't be impossible, just switch off whatever impossibly sophisticated piece of AI lets these genocide-machines tell friend from foe. So you're never going to be "safe." There'll just be some other enemy to squish and suddenly you're the paranoid nutjob cradling a shotgun and a bottle of whiskey and waiting and hoping and praying for someone to try and rob you, just let the TRY...

Oh, bear in mind the suggested acceleration method was nuclear pulse propulsion. I once calculated that the HST could just about see a modestly-sized nuke at a distance of 1 light year. No advanced race will miss one of these launching.

[Anonymous No.2347882]

>see this thread
>have a feeling I know what vid it is
>mfw I was already watching it the 50th time

[Anonymous No.2347906]

>>2347838
Do as you will, but I would rather be the last thing living in a dieing universe. Impotently shaking my fist into the empty blackness until I run out of power and die, and my atoms break down into nothing. Rather than have a hundred times as much "experience" in a simulated reality.

I don't get the obsession with experience and emotions. To me emotions are just tools that can be used to reinforce desirable behaviors. And experience that doesn't offer applicable data is just a waste time. I really wish that there was a way to remove the weaknesses and human frailties that we are all victim to. I like my job but even I need a day off, why to you think I'm on /sci/ now, but I really wish I didn't desire breaks or time off.

[Anonymous No.2347955]

>HST could just about see a modestly-sized nuke at a distance of 1 light year

I'm actually really interested, tell me more. What yield were you using? Nuclear pulse propulsion detonations are usually 0.2-5 kilotons. With 2-3 detonations each second. Also I would have thought you'd what to look for gamma rays since that is what most of the energy of a thermonuclear reaction gets released as.

[Anonymous No.2347981]

>Yeah, and what if they decide to do it to us?
In the posts above the idea was that if humans agressivly spread to every stellar system in the galaxy they could destroy probes while they attempting to collect resources for self-replicaton. But they also admitted that there would probably be tons or wars and non-replicating rvks being fired all the time. But with their plan a few billion casualties each decade would be a drop in the bucket so far as the human population is concerned.

I think the "safety" they are talking about is assuring the continued survival of the human race and its descendants as a whole at the expense of all other intelligent life.

[Anonymous No.2348010]

>>2347955
I'd just seen the 2nd season finale of the BSG remake. I was gonna go all "you can't see nukes at 1ly, dumbfucks" (I was pissed because previously, nuclear weapons had been handled well by the series). So I assumed a yield such as the smallest "big" modern-ish nuke at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield
That's around 400TJ. I then basically made shit up, - assume all the energy is dispersed in one second, and that the detector can observe the entire spectrum and pick up all of it. The luminosity follows as 400TW, from there find the apparent magnitude at 1ly to be something like 30.4 - very faint, but the HST can detect things 10 times fainter.

So I decided that was okay, they probably had plot-powered telescopes of superior quality, it's fine.

Or it was actually only a wee bit fainter and I decided to let it slip because I'd made so many assumptions. Not like there weren't plenty of other things to criticise about that episode.

[blueshift !31415Od6us No.2348081]

>>2344539
I just watched this video and it really touched me, I mean deep deep down. I want to help get us to the closest stars and planets so that we are not stuck on this one planet, so that we can move past our infancy, so fragile, so weak, so easily destroyed. What can I do? I am yet to go into University so what classes should I take? I am relying on you, /sci/entists, for my answers here, now.

pic related; we need to get off this rock before it happens

[Anonymous No.2348109]

>>2348081

>you will never aid humanity in its quest to colonize the galaxy and live on in perpetuity

[Anonymous No.2348130]

>>2348010
What I never unterstood in that show for the very few episodes I saw was, why isn't every shell and missile a nuclear warhead.

I mean you can fit a gun-type U235 warhead in a 120mm cannon shell and supposedly you could fit a warhead with Califorium as the fuel in an 88mm shell. Why is every weapon not a nuke? It's space, you want to hit the enemy with as much force as you can. Now I can understand using shrapnel to damage a pusher plate since they are designed to withstand nuclear detonations, but non of the ships hat pusher plates.

[blueshift !31415Od6us No.2348143]

>>2348109
I can try, and that's all I want. So I ask, what can i do to try, just try?

[Anonymous No.2348174]

>>2348081
that story is fucking awesome

last line made me piss myself

[Anonymous No.2348190]

>>2348130
It's a show with SPEHSS FIGHTERS. You can fight the "that's impossible" parts, but I'd just leave the "that's illogical" parts alone.

[Anonymous No.2348277]

>>2348190
Well I stopped watching almost immediately, but I heard they had some trite "cycle of fate" faggotry. For me a plot that says "humans didn't originate on Earth is just fucking stupid. It was stupid in the 70s, but with the paleontological evidence today it's just beyond dumb. I can't suspend my disbelief if they are trying to tie it to modern Earth like that.

Now they could have had Earth turn out to be the homeworld of humanity and be populated by nut job cyborgs that worship technology, forcing the humans and robots to join together to have any change against them.

No Earthlings you are the techpriests! But that would have been something original and we can't have that.

[Anonymous No.2348301]

Berserker drones are a stupid idea and you should feel stupid. Here's why:

#1: You're proposing a planet-killing plague of deadly robots. Naturally there has to be some way of determining whether or not the planet they have in their sights is a human world. From a distance, all habitable planets would probably seem pretty similar. This means you'd need a pretty damn complex system to allow it to identify which worlds are occupied by humans and not by aliens. What happens if there's a slight mutation in the code for this system, and the machines can no longer distinguish human worlds from others? Well, then, for one thing, the machines that can't tell human worlds from alien ones would have an advantage in that they'd have more material with which to reproduce, so there'd be a selective pressure ensuring that there are plenty of them around. tl;dr "Self-replicating doomsday machines? How could THAT possibly backfire?"

#2: Instead of going on the offense, we could just go for the defensive route, build a Dyson Swarm around the sun, spread throughout the galaxy, and just generally become pretty much unkillable. What are they going to do, build self-replicating black holes?

#3: This isn't a pure prisoner's dilemma situation. We have more to lose if we launch probes than if nobody launches probes, in the form of trade and the exchange of ideas and culture. It'd be like, in the original Prisoner's Dilemma thought experiment, if both prisoners went free when neither of them testified against the other. We'd basically be launching death machines in the fear that other species are paranoid and irrational enough to launch death machines.

The most important point, I think, is #1. Launching these things would be suicidal.

[Anonymous No.2348323]

>>2348081

Send me an e-mail, blueshift.

Perhaps I can interest you in my life goal.

Perhaps one day, we will work together.

[Anonymous No.2348330]

>>2348081

OF COURSE. Fail to send the picture, everything is wiped out. Here's the e-mail.

[Anonymous No.2348353]

>Well, then, for one thing, the machines that can't tell human worlds from alien ones would have an advantage in that they'd have more material with which to reproduce, so there'd be a selective pressure ensuring that there are plenty of them around. tl;dr "Self-replicating doomsday machines? How could THAT possibly backfire?"

Did you read the original post they way these things attack is by acting as rvks. The probes that attack humans would have no reproductive superiority to those that dont't.

They last time we did this tread a few people came up with a couple of ways to prevent this problem from becoming serious.

First have the berserker probes avoid systems that are broadcasting a specific radio transmission.

Second have a protocol that the probes don't attack anything in the local stellar cluster

Third. Have humans spreading with the probes so that they can monitor the devices for deviant activity but don't have to actually manufacture them since they are still self-replicating.

No probes will still break down or fuck up and become hostile, but that is the price you pay for eliminating all competition. Or you could have humans themselves just construct berserkers as they need given the situation.

The ultimate plan was to have a wave of these probes spreading out in front of a wave of human colonization so that we can eliminate any potential threats as quickly as possible.

[Anonymous No.2348375]

>>2348353
And once we have the solar system locked in good enough and have matured all our technology we realize we're alone in the universe and have reached stagnation. And any hope for novel diversity trough other life forms is snuffed out because we fucking killed them.

I wonder why mankind have such a huge fascionation with killing stuff. Some argue we should kill people to solve our nonexistant overpopulation problem, other argue we should kill the rest of the universe to solve any outer threat.

Now here's a suprise: Any internal threats are likely to be much greater than external ones when we reach a certain point in our development. A few rogue space tugs could drop a apocalypse size meteor on earth and be rid of the whole mankind, how about you solve that scenario instead of being paranoid and designing berserkers.

[Anonymous No.2348424]

>>2348375
>realize we're alone in the universe
One galaxy ain't the universe. But with antihydrogen annihilation engines we can go to other galaxies at an economical rate. And after all life not derived from homos sapiens sapiens is dead we'll fight each other for the scraps until the stars burn dim. Then we'll fight some more. You like "novelty" I like meaningless conflict between those that are actually quite similar for petty reasons. Different strokes pal, different strokes.

[Anonymous No.2348444]

>>2348375
>>2348424
Well there is the hope that after turning every stellar system in the universe into dyson swarms of computational equipment we might find some way to escape heat death. Pretty unlikely but, its the best chance we got. Leaving even large areas of space unexploited in order to preserve non-human life is just such a waste of good mass.

[Colin !!GWicPmfSgsD No.2348484]

>>2348444
>building things
>escaping heat death
Increasing order is the result of a larger decrease in the order of the surrounding system(s).

As my biochem professors used to say, "nothing has accelerated the death of the universe as much as life."

[Anonymous No.2348509]

Biochem != Megascale Engineering

The energy released by the stars is the same no matter what you build around them. The stars will burn out at the same time regardless. The whole point of converting as much of the non-stellar mass of the universe as we can into computing devices and placing them in dyson swarms is to use as much of energy radiated by stellar objects for computation as possible. But you will never be using the entire stars output. The swarm is too diffuse for that.

The reason to do all that computation is to try and find some quirk that will let use escape heat death. And it's also surely not going to happen. But we will all die at the same time whether we try or not.

[Anonymous No.2348519]

>>2348444
sauce on that aweomse picture?

[Anonymous No.2348525]

>>2348484
Then your biochem teacher is an idiot that doesn't how stellar evolution works. How the hell has life effected th lifetime of stars yet? One that's right, it hasn't.

[I eat babies !!po7MGTNbzf/ No.2348529]

>>2348519
http://tinyurl.com/6gmcu73

[Anonymous No.2348530]

>>2348519
AT43

[Anonymous No.2348541]

http://www.singularity2050.com/2009/05/seti-and-the-singularity.html

link related

[Anonymous No.2348574]

>>2348541
But they are only looking at signals. Why don't we see probes and colonies in every stellar system if this postulated "post singularity" civilization exists? The singularity hypothesis is mostly over optimistic bullshit but that is a discussion for another time.

un altered

[Anonymous No.2348696]

>>2347906
>To me emotions are just tools that can be used to reinforce desirable behaviors.

confirmed for autism.

you are literally less then human. You are just as alien to a vast majority of humans as anything we could find out in space.

[Anonymous No.2348745]

>>2348696
>Autism
>treats emotions as tools or weaknesses
>Autism

Does Autism work that way. Or is has Autism just become the catch all term I think it has.

[Anonymous No.2349076]

>>2348745
Autism also works that way.

He's basically Sheldon from Big Bang Theory.

[Anonymous No.2350008]

>>2349076
>BBT reference
Get the fuck out of my /sci/.