Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

onezero.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 182 posts

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#51

Post by morley »

beat wrote: post #4

As much as I love Cixin Liu's "Dark Forest" concept (I've sung my praises of his novels quite a bit here), I'm not sure this post fully fleshes out the analogy. I think it could be developed further, though. What makes Cixin's dark forest so awful is that new intelligent species are going out into a Universe with other species millions of years more advanced than they are, species that can easily exterminate entire s…

There are some forms of internet "weapons" that I think reach the same scale as the ones in Cixin's series:

  - Social media harassment
  - Review bombs 
  - Doxxing
  - Swatting
Luckily, the internet is not at a point where any individual who reveals their contact information is subject to these problems.

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#52

Post by KirinDave »

jerf wrote: post #22
beat wrote: post #4

As much as I love Cixin Liu's "Dark Forest" concept (I've sung my praises of his novels quite a bit here), I'm not sure this post fully fleshes out the analogy. I think it could be developed further, though. What makes Cixin's dark forest so awful is that new intelligent species are going out into a Universe with other species millions of years more advanced than they are, species that can easily exterminate entire s…

If the Internet is a dark forest, it's not populated by evil aliens out to kill you, but a witch in a beautiful gingerbread house inviting you to eat your fill. Don't ask about why the oven seems so dirty.

Spoken like someone who has never pissed off fascists and found death threats in their PO box. Or lost their job because of a tweet about men being sexisg. Or (to flip the political spectrum), been carefully outed from your hidden fascist leanings by undercover agents and machine learning, instantly losing your job and being evicted from your home.

Violence exists on the internet.

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#53

Post by mlcrypto »

davesque wrote: post #11

A bit off-topic, but I've kind of struggled mentally since finishing The Dark Forest . Even though it's science fiction, it actually seems hard to argue with the theory in the book -- that civilizations must act to eliminate each other or they are overwhelmingly likely to be eliminated themselves. I'd like to believe it's not true, but so long as any two civilizations are likely to have dramatically different rates o…

I think with the rate of technological growth an intelligent species can improve to match another quicker than they can travel across space. Or perhaps even surpass an isolated travelling group.

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#54

Post by nyolfen »

X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #45

I feel like there are some really nice ideas in here, but I felt like the metaphor of the dark forest really took a turn when the author started using it to describe the communication channels they felt like were still safe. I'd personally term those burrows or something. Something that is hidden from external observers walking through the dark forest.

warrens: https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/10/27/warrens-plazas-and-the...

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#55

Post by abecedarius »

F_r_k wrote: post #37
ethbro wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

grinds teeth A vein almost explodes in my forehead everytime someone points to Cixin Liu as the originator of DFT. The idea's been around since the early to mid-80s, and people could at least do diligence to properly cite. It's almost as insulting as if I said "When George Lucas started science fiction films with Star Wars..."

Could you cite some books that covered DFT ? I'm eager to read them

The earliest I remember was by Greg Benford: something in the series that started with In the Ocean of Night (1970s). I think it was that novel, but I'm not sure; but towards the end of the one I'm thinking of, as this picture of the universe was coming together, a character thought of the nighttime sky as like the eyes of hungry predators surrounding a campfire.

(Not to say I think this theory about the Fermi paradox is a very good one.)

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#56

Post by xxandroxygen »

sandworm101 wrote: post #38
ethbro wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

grinds teeth A vein almost explodes in my forehead everytime someone points to Cixin Liu as the originator of DFT. The idea's been around since the early to mid-80s, and people could at least do diligence to properly cite. It's almost as insulting as if I said "When George Lucas started science fiction films with Star Wars..."

Star wars isn't science fiction. Lucas tells us so in the first frame: a long time ago in a galaxy far far away: it isnt about us or where science may take us in the future. It is a samurai movie with lasers.

You're getting downvoted but in the end you're right - Star Wars is an epic fantasy with science-fiction-y things in it, hence why it doesn't follow rules about things like sound in space

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#57

Post by xxandroxygen »

X6S1x6Okd1st wrote: post #45

I feel like there are some really nice ideas in here, but I felt like the metaphor of the dark forest really took a turn when the author started using it to describe the communication channels they felt like were still safe. I'd personally term those burrows or something. Something that is hidden from external observers walking through the dark forest.

I agree, I was pretty confused when dark forests went from "things hiding from predators" to "safe, separate spaces to communicate"

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#58

Post by WorldMaker »

livueta wrote: post #42
F_r_k wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you cite some books that covered DFT ? I'm eager to read them

I'm pretty sure David Brin touches on it somewhere, but not to the extent of being the basis of an entire novel. Can't recall exactly where, sadly. At minimum, Revelation Space features it as a major plot-point and was published in 2000, significantly predating Dark Forest .

It's related to the premise of David Brin's Uplift series, so in one way it's the basis of multiple trilogies of books.

It's been one possible answer for as long as sci-fi has debated the Drake equation and Fermi paradox. Arguably, it is a critical part of the thesis of War of the Worlds as far back as the late 19th Century.

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#59

Post by beat »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #35
beat wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone reaches the conclusions of the Dark Forest. But those who don't reach it are exterminated.

In the books, or in the real world? In the real world there are many competing theories about why the universe is silent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

In the books. It's just the author's theory for the Fermi Paradox. And it's a compelling and terrifying theory.

Re: The Dark Forest Theory of the Internet

#60

Post by beat »

ethbro wrote: post #32
beat wrote: post #4

As much as I love Cixin Liu's "Dark Forest" concept (I've sung my praises of his novels quite a bit here), I'm not sure this post fully fleshes out the analogy. I think it could be developed further, though. What makes Cixin's dark forest so awful is that new intelligent species are going out into a Universe with other species millions of years more advanced than they are, species that can easily exterminate entire s…

grinds teeth A vein almost explodes in my forehead everytime someone points to Cixin Liu as the originator of DFT. The idea's been around since the early to mid-80s, and people could at least do diligence to properly cite. It's almost as insulting as if I said "When George Lucas started science fiction films with Star Wars..."

Sure, there's some prior art. But it's not necessary or relevant to cite the prior art when talking about a specific work. If you read carefully, you'll find I didn't claim he was the originator, because duh.
Post reply on HN