Live data from Hacker News

SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

supercluster.com

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#41
post #36
post #32

While I do share a certain romantic admiration for the grandeur of SETI's goals, I have to agree with those who call this a waste of money and brainpower in our times. The most ludicrous AGI apocalypse scenarios seem orders of magnitude more likely than finding conclusive evidence of extraterrestrial intelligence. A second terrestrial intelligence is about to emerge, and the consequences of that might conceivably be…

It’s science. It’s not in preparation for some kind of imminent encounter whose likelihood is weighed against some other event, but simply trying to understand our universe. Maybe AI can do much better at interpreting signals than humans do, and we should build this lunar station so that the post-human AGI can listen to calls from other distant AGIs. It would certainly have more patience for interstellar communicatio…

Science is a human endeavor, and like all human endeavors, it is subject to human limitations and resource constraints. Humanity surviving is a prerequisite for doing SETI, and that means preferentially allocating resources to projects that work on mitigating existential threats, everything else being equal.

Now, I'm not asking that carpenters be reassigned to work on AI extinction scenarios. That wouldn't make sense, because it's not their area of expertise. But if you are already going to spend resources on hypothetical non-human intelligences, surely the kind of intelligence we are by far most likely to actually encounter deserves the most attention. And in the absence of unlimited resources (i.e., in reality), that goes at the expense of lower priority intelligence scenarios.

Note that these people are asking for a telescope to be built on the moon. That's an absolutely enormous expense, that, needless to say, wouldn't be funded by those scientists but by society as a whole. Resources are limited, so every decision to fund something means not funding something else. Priorities are a thing, and "it's science" doesn't change that.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#42
post #14

I doubt SETI could detect even our own signals, when it’s encrypted digital data. I mean it’s just noise like any background signal.. Then, we people are very soon capable of communicating using quantum entanglement, which means it’s beyond wireless and you simply couldn’t tap into it with some antenna. For these reasons I suspect that SETI is waste of money.

> we people are very soon capable of communicating using quantum entanglement

This is nothing other than sci-fi. I don't understand how you can be so sure of something like this.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#43
post #14

I doubt SETI could detect even our own signals, when it’s encrypted digital data. I mean it’s just noise like any background signal.. Then, we people are very soon capable of communicating using quantum entanglement, which means it’s beyond wireless and you simply couldn’t tap into it with some antenna. For these reasons I suspect that SETI is waste of money.

Yeah but they’ve wasted their lives doing it so they’re going to keep up the act.

That's a very unpleasant and cynical way to put it, but the underlying idea is true. Admitting that you spent a big portion of your life on something that has no realistic chance of success is a herculean task, and most people understandably find it much easier to just continue in the pretense that it was, and still is, worth their time.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#44
post #41
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s science. It’s not in preparation for some kind of imminent encounter whose likelihood is weighed against some other event, but simply trying to understand our universe. Maybe AI can do much better at interpreting signals than humans do, and we should build this lunar station so that the post-human AGI can listen to calls from other distant AGIs. It would certainly have more patience for interstellar communicatio…

Science is a human endeavor, and like all human endeavors, it is subject to human limitations and resource constraints. Humanity surviving is a prerequisite for doing SETI, and that means preferentially allocating resources to projects that work on mitigating existential threats, everything else being equal. Now, I'm not asking that carpenters be reassigned to work on AI extinction scenarios. That wouldn't make sense…

I find it fascinating that people in 2023 argue with „resource constraints“ when talking about scientific projects. Those guys working on that are experts, they wouldnt do much else, the money spent on this is comparatively a joke in comparison to other spendings with much more questionable reasoning, and starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument; it lies within the basic idea of science to question and reach out of our comfort zone

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#45
post #15
post #14

I doubt SETI could detect even our own signals, when it’s encrypted digital data. I mean it’s just noise like any background signal.. Then, we people are very soon capable of communicating using quantum entanglement, which means it’s beyond wireless and you simply couldn’t tap into it with some antenna. For these reasons I suspect that SETI is waste of money.

Yeah, the SETI Institute's site says we wouldn't be able to pick up signals from an earth like civilization in the system closest to us[1]: > If an extraterrestrial civilization has a SETI project similar to our own, could they detect signals from Earth? > In general, no. Most earthly transmissions are too weak to be found by equipment similar to ours at the distance of even the nearest star. But there are some impor…

I don’t see that as being much of a problem. Although we would not be able to detect regular Earth signals, we are relatively near the point where we would be able to detect Earth, including its atmospheric composition. Given we’ve already sent the Arecibo message, we might be likely to send such a signal to Earth. If so, other beings may as well.

I think the real problem is the timing. It seems unlikely that anyone will be looking at the same time anyone else is sending a message.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#46
post #44
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Science is a human endeavor, and like all human endeavors, it is subject to human limitations and resource constraints. Humanity surviving is a prerequisite for doing SETI, and that means preferentially allocating resources to projects that work on mitigating existential threats, everything else being equal. Now, I'm not asking that carpenters be reassigned to work on AI extinction scenarios. That wouldn't make sense…

I find it fascinating that people in 2023 argue with „resource constraints“ when talking about scientific projects. Those guys working on that are experts, they wouldnt do much else, the money spent on this is comparatively a joke in comparison to other spendings with much more questionable reasoning, and starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument; it lies within th…

> starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument

It most certainly is, at least in the real world. The ISS has cost more than $150 billion so far. That's not "a joke", it's the GDP of a mid-size country. I very much do hope that everyone involved is asking themselves hard questions about whether this expense is justified by whatever has been gained in return. Science is not a magical la-la-land where people have the right to piss away truckloads of public money on projects they feel are important, simply by virtue of invoking vague platitudes about the "need for humanity to know".

There are an endless number of scientific projects all looking for resources to fund them. If (potential) gain isn't the right criterion for prioritization, then I don't know what is.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#47
post #46
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating that people in 2023 argue with „resource constraints“ when talking about scientific projects. Those guys working on that are experts, they wouldnt do much else, the money spent on this is comparatively a joke in comparison to other spendings with much more questionable reasoning, and starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument; it lies within th…

> starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument It most certainly is, at least in the real world. The ISS has cost more than $150 billion so far. That's not "a joke", it's the GDP of a mid-size country. I very much do hope that everyone involved is asking themselves hard questions about whether this expense is justified by whatever has been gained in return. Science is…

It's also about curiosity and fun. The public can fund something they find interesting for the sake of it.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#48
post #41
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s science. It’s not in preparation for some kind of imminent encounter whose likelihood is weighed against some other event, but simply trying to understand our universe. Maybe AI can do much better at interpreting signals than humans do, and we should build this lunar station so that the post-human AGI can listen to calls from other distant AGIs. It would certainly have more patience for interstellar communicatio…

Science is a human endeavor, and like all human endeavors, it is subject to human limitations and resource constraints. Humanity surviving is a prerequisite for doing SETI, and that means preferentially allocating resources to projects that work on mitigating existential threats, everything else being equal. Now, I'm not asking that carpenters be reassigned to work on AI extinction scenarios. That wouldn't make sense…

> Note that these people are asking for a telescope to be built on the moon. That's an absolutely enormous expense

Less than it cost to send a roadster to Mars. The cost of two superbowl’s worth of adds. The revenue from a moderately successful movie.

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#49
post #46
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it fascinating that people in 2023 argue with „resource constraints“ when talking about scientific projects. Those guys working on that are experts, they wouldnt do much else, the money spent on this is comparatively a joke in comparison to other spendings with much more questionable reasoning, and starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument; it lies within th…

> starting to question the gain of a project in the scientific space is never really an argument It most certainly is, at least in the real world. The ISS has cost more than $150 billion so far. That's not "a joke", it's the GDP of a mid-size country. I very much do hope that everyone involved is asking themselves hard questions about whether this expense is justified by whatever has been gained in return. Science is…

> The ISS has cost more than $150 billion so far.

Wow, a whole three "midlife crisis ceo twitter buyouts".

Re: SETI scientists to devise plan for lunar listening station

#50
post #14

I doubt SETI could detect even our own signals, when it’s encrypted digital data. I mean it’s just noise like any background signal.. Then, we people are very soon capable of communicating using quantum entanglement, which means it’s beyond wireless and you simply couldn’t tap into it with some antenna. For these reasons I suspect that SETI is waste of money.

Depends on the signal. There is lots of complexity in a 4G LTE or 5G signal. Take a look at the waterfall of this 4G base station.

https://www.w6rz.net/attlte.png

Post reply on HN