Earlier quoted context omitted.
Possible answer: First nearly every civilization that mastered, say, radio, did it millions of years ago. Second, nearly every such civilization long ago found much better means of communications than we know about. Third, they realize that trying to communicate via radio is silly and use much better means we don't know about. Net, they are out there and communicating, but we don't hear them and they don't hear us or…
But if they're so advanced, they probably still have radio receivers somewhere though. They should be able to receive our signals and reply with some sort of super advanced method that appears as radio waves so that we can receive them, but that travel much faster so it doesn't take a thousand years to reach us.
Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
131–140 of 231 posts
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#132I really did not expect this much resistance on HN to a fairly classical solution to the fermi paradox. Mostly it's spun in a more positive "retreat into virtual reality" type situation but it's the same thing. We have no idea how humans will react to the ability to sate every desire and wish artifically. It's not just hyper-porn and the xbox 720, this would apply to the desire for exploration, solving hard problems,…
It's not just the benefits of instant, unlimited sensory gratification (which are IMMENSE - real-world physical attraction and location no longer becomes an issue for finding partners, you can enjoy any activity at any time which in the past could cost you enormously in terms of money and/or risk: in a virtual world there's no spread of diseases if you're not in physical contact with people, no risk of death driving @ 140mph, etc. which also means a reduction in health costs, etc.).
It's simply far more efficient in many ways: why physically travel to work when you can have virtual meetings, offices, etc.? You could attend university anywhere in the world regardless of your location. Doctors could operate remotely where it's physically cheaper to live. Sitting at home all day (or in a Matrix farm) also means using less energy so you eat the bare minimum, don't need to own a car, don't need a big house with a garden, etc. On a larger scale, how useful will e.g. war become as the demand for physical resources falls? The efficiencies are mind-blowing; it is globalization of both personal and economic activities and human resource allocation without the physical constraints.
Ironically enough, in the same vein as your comment, I would expect people on HN are more likely to be fans of such an extreme form of telecommuting, telelearning, etc.
Not that I'm not suggesting all of this is good or healthy. Who knows what the psychological or physical effects of such a lifestyle will be.
Speculating further: At that point, why bother exploring the universe? Or more interesting: to what extent would wealth exist? It seems people would only need enough wealth to maintain their physical bodies and access to the planetary supercomputer. Accumulating more wealth could prove very difficult since classical economics falls apart in a virtual world where supply can become potentially unlimited over time. Would it be possible to accumulate sufficient "real" wealth to construct devices capable of finding and communicating with aliens, and/or visiting them? Would industries capable of building such devices even exist after everybody moves into the matrix after a few thousand years? All in all, once civilization reaches a particular level of technological development, it seems like there's a very small window where anybody will see benefit to OR have the resources to communicate with aliens.
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hahaha thanks. I read somewhere that at the same time you think of a grand new idea, 10 people somewhere in the world will also have the same idea. I doubt that's always true, but it's pretty amazing nonetheless.
Heh, that is depressingly likely given the numbers. There must be a german word for the appreciation of a clever/accurate but depressing idea.
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
Locally, rich countries are actually quite good at cleaning up. As an example, compare England today with England 150 years ago.
Unfortunately that's mostly accomplished through economic means of displacing the mess to poorer places. Our actual levels of consumption and destruction globally has only increased.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Stink
(Check out the cartoon of Faraday!)
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is completely legitimate, right? There must be a most advanced civilization. Why can't we be it?
Yes, that's possible. It just goes against the Copernican Principle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copernican_principle ), and that's why many people are not happy with that explanation.
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting point. Based on what the author of this post is saying I wonder if the average human were given the option to enter a virtual reality where they could set the parameters to whatever they want would people know the difference or even care to find out? If you could have any beautiful woman you want, a great body, and great financials who would want to leave that fantasy?
One obstacle might be that by entering the VR, you'd be ceding a lot of control to the people "outside" your reality--they might gain physical advantage over you or hack your VR. But if that concern could be definitively answered--and I think it could--then quite possibly the VR is a good move. Maybe any preference for our outside, non-simulative reality will in time be seen as narrow-minded chauvinism.
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#137I think it is because the Drake equation[1] over-estimates the chances of intelligent life forming. A common average result for the Drake equation is 10,000 habitable planets capable of sending signals in our universe. But if you look at the equation and estimates they are a bit optimistic. If you take fℓ from the equation, I don't think simply being of the right composition in the habitable zone is enough. The Earth…
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are right, in theory. But I get this feeling, more and more, that big, world changing companies, don't need ads revenue. The number of visits on the internet is less relevant for them. You picked some companies randomly, but out of them SpaceX and Boeing are not selling stuff over the internet. There is this hunch, that what we do, doesn't matter. It's mostly self congratulatory friend/social app. Yes, you might…
The companies that buy Boeings products very much are selling stuff over the Internet.
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#139I really did not expect this much resistance on HN to a fairly classical solution to the fermi paradox. Mostly it's spun in a more positive "retreat into virtual reality" type situation but it's the same thing. We have no idea how humans will react to the ability to sate every desire and wish artifically. It's not just hyper-porn and the xbox 720, this would apply to the desire for exploration, solving hard problems,…
But by having people click on those ads, the companies that are advertising (which could be and are companies actively engaged in "physical" products) are acquiring paying customers and thus have greater ability to fund their products. SpaceX, Boeing, GM, and Victoria Secret need revenue sources to create their 'non-virtual-reality' products, and marketing/advertising creates a revenue source. If they had a net loss…
Re: Why We Haven’t Met Any Aliens
#140The physicist David Deutsch makes the point that there is no real way to distinguish a consistent, convincing virtual reality from reality itself. Therefore, there is no real moral difference between richly populating such virtual worlds (once we can construct them--we can't quite, yet) and populating actual other planets. Nick Bostrom would say that even using the word "actual" is probably wrong, since we're likely…