Imagine that you came across an enormous dry grassland, continuously covered with dense grass. It seems to go on for thousands of miles in all directions, and historical records suggest that it has been in this same dry state for millions of years. You conclude that if a spark had touched it anywhere anytime during that period, a fire would have begun that would eventually spread across the entire grassland.
Re "hidden disasters much more severe and frequent than we suspect":
Are prediction markets able to assess existential risks?
It isn't clear to me how a successful prediction would be paid.
On a slightly less existential question (since it would not preclude AGI-based colonization)
"Metaculus has 68% on AGI existing by 2030 but only 2% on humans
going extinct by 2100. That seems way too optimistic about AI
alignment."
( from https://astralcodexten.subs... )As prediction markets currently run, is this truly expected to be the best available estimate of the odds? Can it be improved?
That sounds about right: older civilizations might be able to prevent younger civilizations from seeing them coming, but there would be a period when younger civilizations leak their location data to any older civilizations nearby who are looking in their direction. However, it might not be possible to detect young civilizations in other galaxies at all. I think at the moment, we can only see if a whole galaxy emits biosignatures - due to noise. Younger civilizations could possibly escape being detected by older ones - by being small and distant.
This would only allow a civilization to buy time relative to civilizations younger than themselves, right? (Any older civilization with eyes sufficiently nearby would have plenty of time to notice their planet's biosignature before the aliens grew advanced enough to be able to manipulate their atmosphere, or even see value in doing so).
Our main means of detecting alien planetary life involves mass spectroscopy. That looks at the spectrum emitted by stars with planets, uses the doppler effect to subtract the spectrum of the star from the spectrum of the planet. That process would identify nearby stars which hosted planets bearing life like ours. However, it is possible that it would miss more advanced forms of life. In particular, if advanced aliens were hiding to avoid drawing attention to themselves, they could probably manipulate the atmospheric content of their planets to avoid emitting biosignatures. It is plausible that this would act to buy them time before being contacted by aliens - reducing the chance that they would subsequently be assimilated. This is similar to the "Dark Forest" hypothesis. We don't see distant aliens headed our way - but that could be because they are hiding from us - and from each other.
Without commenting on the broader question of feasibility we certainly do have compact power sources that can last that long. We're still in communication with the Voyager space probe and it was launched 45 years ago.
Also, the claim that Machine AGI is flat impossible is an extremely strong (and imho extremely suspect) claim.
That might be true if you're limiting you're travel time to a single lifespan and your transport to a single unit. But if the goal is to just spread, a more effective way would be multiple vehicles that could sustain themselves for a longer time scale.
Really? "Fate of the universe" is a standard trope in fiction - I don't think it would be if most people didn't care about it.
The universe is where everyone and everything you care about is going to be once you're gone. Saying you don't care about it is equivalent to saying you don't care about anything (literally) other than yourself. I suppose there are some such people (maybe Chad is one of them) but I'm not convinced there's a lot.
"sending robots" != "interstellar travel"In any case, it's not clear we can do that either. Even if we could launch a craft at 0.1c (which we can't!), it would take over 40 years to reach Proxima Centauri. Lots of opportunity for it to be destroyed en route or otherwise fail to reach it's destination. Do we even have compact power sources that can last that long?
And if your notion of "robots" implies some kind of AGI leap, then that's yet another base claim I'd dispute. Machine AGI is also not possible.
Re "hidden disasters much more severe and frequent than we suspect":
Are prediction markets able to assess existential risks?
It isn't clear to me how a successful prediction would be paid.
On a slightly less existential question (since it would not preclude AGI-based colonization)
"Metaculus has 68% on AGI existing by 2030 but only 2% on humans
going extinct by 2100. That seems way too optimistic about AI
alignment."
( from https://astralcodexten.subs... )As prediction markets currently run, is this truly expected to be the best available estimate of the odds? Can it be improved?
That sounds about right: older civilizations might be able to prevent younger civilizations from seeing them coming, but there would be a period when younger civilizations leak their location data to any older civilizations nearby who are looking in their direction. However, it might not be possible to detect young civilizations in other galaxies at all. I think at the moment, we can only see if a whole galaxy emits biosignatures - due to noise. Younger civilizations could possibly escape being detected by older ones - by being small and distant.
This would only allow a civilization to buy time relative to civilizations younger than themselves, right? (Any older civilization with eyes sufficiently nearby would have plenty of time to notice their planet's biosignature before the aliens grew advanced enough to be able to manipulate their atmosphere, or even see value in doing so).
Our main means of detecting alien planetary life involves mass spectroscopy. That looks at the spectrum emitted by stars with planets, uses the doppler effect to subtract the spectrum of the star from the spectrum of the planet. That process would identify nearby stars which hosted planets bearing life like ours. However, it is possible that it would miss more advanced forms of life. In particular, if advanced aliens were hiding to avoid drawing attention to themselves, they could probably manipulate the atmospheric content of their planets to avoid emitting biosignatures. It is plausible that this would act to buy them time before being contacted by aliens - reducing the chance that they would subsequently be assimilated. This is similar to the "Dark Forest" hypothesis. We don't see distant aliens headed our way - but that could be because they are hiding from us - and from each other.
We kinda know the fate of the Universe; heat death. I don't think we can reverse that.
Ha! You got me. I have an affection for deontological moral theories, but I didn't like the way it was assumed.
Without commenting on the broader question of feasibility we certainly do have compact power sources that can last that long. We're still in communication with the Voyager space probe and it was launched 45 years ago.
Also, the claim that Machine AGI is flat impossible is an extremely strong (and imho extremely suspect) claim.
That might be true if you're limiting you're travel time to a single lifespan and your transport to a single unit. But if the goal is to just spread, a more effective way would be multiple vehicles that could sustain themselves for a longer time scale.
Are there any duties, morally speaking?
Really? "Fate of the universe" is a standard trope in fiction - I don't think it would be if most people didn't care about it.
The universe is where everyone and everything you care about is going to be once you're gone. Saying you don't care about it is equivalent to saying you don't care about anything (literally) other than yourself. I suppose there are some such people (maybe Chad is one of them) but I'm not convinced there's a lot.
Most people do before life crushes it out of them. Not many adults do in 2022.
If you don't care about the fate of the universe, you don't. I do. I think most people do.
Well, why do I care about that? That doesn't sound like a duty to me.
"sending robots" != "interstellar travel"In any case, it's not clear we can do that either. Even if we could launch a craft at 0.1c (which we can't!), it would take over 40 years to reach Proxima Centauri. Lots of opportunity for it to be destroyed en route or otherwise fail to reach it's destination. Do we even have compact power sources that can last that long?
And if your notion of "robots" implies some kind of AGI leap, then that's yet another base claim I'd dispute. Machine AGI is also not possible.
If we don't what? If we don't preserve the precious flame of civilization and spread it?
Then the universe remains cold and empty forever. That's all.
We do? What happens if we don't?