

Addiction to videogames explains the Fermi paradox? - gojomo
http://www.edge.org/q2007/q07_print.html#miller

======
petercooper
_Actually colonizing the galaxy would be so much harder than pretending to
have done it when filming Star Wars or Serenity._

This article relates to one of my crazier recurring thoughts. Looking at how
most of us have readily shifted to or accepting of virtual experiences and
Baudrillard type "simulacra", I can't help but run the clock 250 years forward
to see people willingly living with their brains permanently wired into an
artificial reality (or, if we "crack" consciousness, being converted into
conscious computer programs of sorts).

No longer would fighting the laws of physics be necessary, you could merely
play a futuristic, hyperreal version of EVE Online in what your brain would
identify as "reality" and do whatever you like.

But ultimately, I think we're guided by our minds and feelings. If we get the
ability to keep a brain in a post-orgasmic-esque level of satisfaction and
inactivity for perpetuity, it's probably game over for humanity.

~~~
derefr
Yup. This is always why I've questioned "technological Singularity"-type
events: even if we might be subjectively much happier, from the point of view
of other alien species we'll basically have just smothered ourselves in a big
blanket of grey goo (nee Computronium.) If we ever do manage to get out into
the galaxy, I expect to see that the vast majority of planets with evidence of
previous civilization (junk in orbit, etc.) are now big grey spheres that are
too busy reveling to be interested in talking to us (but may consider eating
us to add to their Maximum Revelry Potential.)

~~~
olefoo
That would be a fairly frightening hegemonic swarm. I suspect that hedonically
oriented Kardashev type II civilizations are more likely to use a gentle "Join
us and experience the bliss of a thousand heavens." sales pitch; if they have
much of a foreign policy at all.

~~~
derefr
I'm imagining a complete partitioning of utility functions here. To me, a
type-II civilization would be more akin to the planet of the Matrix movies—a
symbiotic system involving:

A. a sentient civilization, living in a virtual universe with unlimited
possibility, and

B. a completely automated outer reality, keeping the sim running, of which the
sentients have (and need) no awareness.

Part of the sentients' remembered history would be that that "we used to live
in a much more limited universe, but then we ascended to this one," or
something like that. The "reality" that the automated system inhabits would be
no more real to the sentients than your fingertip is to your IDE. (And would
have as little realization of an orbital bombardment against the automation as
your IDE has of your fingertip holding down the power button of your
computer.)

The automated system would want only to grow and maintain itself, and would
not have the higher-level thinking capacity required to formulate larger
goals. It would be more like a plant, having the same sort of relationship to
the sentients that we have to bacteria that live in our bloodstreams. (I want
to mention both Avatar and [End of] Evangelion here, for oddly-complementary
visuals.)

~~~
olefoo
I would think that even such a technologically dominant civilization would
want to keep a few sentinels in the base reality. If only to keep an eye out
for stray existential threats. And such a sentinel would be a fascinating
character to base the narrative around; aware of the true nature of things,
given vastly consequential powers in physical reality, but for all that, but
not particularly important in the view of the society running inside.

~~~
derefr
True (I sort of had the feeling that this is why the Great Machine in Babylon
5 required an operator.)

But when you start to think like a post-Singularity sentient, you start to
realize that their ethical system would be much "pickier" than ours. They
would see leaving any of their own (whether biological or AI-based) in the
"limited" reality as a punishment equal in scope to the suffering child of
Omelas—that is to say, one they could not possibly stand for.

------
wcarss
The article is dated, but made a good read. Miller's thesis seems to be that
the consumer and the gamer are en route to extinction, while the puritan and
the luddite shall endure.

A key trend that supports his claim is the drastically lower birth rates in
more developed countries - it appears that as consumerism and perhaps,
indulgence, rise, children become more and more scarce. The data however, is
incomplete. We have no endpoint data, and so we are merely speculating about
the future.

My own freshly formed opinion is that the consumer will not go extinct, but be
assimilated. As Islam, India, and China rise, the western consumer will mix in
among them and become their descendants. They will move toward our
consumerism, we will move toward their work ethic, their pragmatism.

In an interaction between 500 million and >3 Billion people, Newton's laws of
motion apply as though we were free floating masses. At a higher resolution,
500 million is 300 million with several smaller groups floating around it, and
each of the 3 billion is split many ways as well - the interaction will be
complex and the outcome incalculable. I think it would be neat for someone to
make a simulation of that sort.

Anyway, again, good link! I haven't read edge.org before.

~~~
wlievens
> ...it appears that as consumerism and perhaps, indulgence, rise, children
> become more and more scarce...

Correlation doesn't imply causation. The typical explanations for the lower
birth rates are (A) we have pensions, so we don't need more kids as a form of
insurance and (B) we have less time to raise kids because all parents are
working professionals. Neither of those factors have anything to do with
complacency or consumerism.

~~~
nikhilgk
A and B may not be sufficient reasons either. Here is a counter example from
my home state:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model#Human_Development_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerala_model#Human_Development_Index_in_1990)
Economically Kerala is a third world economy, but in Human Development Index
and birth rates it is more closer to developed economies. The birth rate is at
replacement level and still falling even though most people do not have
sufficient pensions, most parents are not professionals and unemployment is
endemic. So you will have to look beyond GDP and consumerism for falling birth
rates.

------
bryanlarsen
For those who have trouble believing the argument, Scott Adams puts it more
cogently: "If I had a holodeck, I'd close the door and never come out until I
died of exhaustion. It would be hard to convince me I should be anywhere but
in the holodeck, getting my oil massage from Cindy Crawford and her simulated
twin sister. I'm afraid the holodeck will be society's last invention."

------
patio11
I get endless amusement from the notion that spending time in consensual non-
realities is productive if and only if the science fiction involved has
terrible production values and a boring plot. Somebody needs to give the Drake
Equation a $100 million art budget so that I never hear it cited as
"scientific" again.

------
hegemonicon
This is what's known as a "superstimulus" - something that pinpoints our
brain's reward and pleasure centers orders of magnitude more than anything
that existed in the evolutionary environment. Heroin and candy bars fall into
the same category.

Of course, heroin and candy bars aren't exactly civilization-level risks -
they're regulated to various degrees, and the people that overconsume simply
self-select out of existence. I'm skeptical that an entire society would fall
under the spell of a game (even a really good one) before society develops
protections against it (through regulation and cultural norms).

Excellent article about superstimuli here:
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/h3/superstimuli_and_the_collapse_of_...](http://lesswrong.com/lw/h3/superstimuli_and_the_collapse_of_western/)

------
nikhilgk
But this argument may be underestimating other human traits like curiosity and
spirit for exploration. Even if we were wired to "simputers" at birth, many of
the hacker types here would want to explore what is beyond those constructs
once made aware of it. This leads me to believe there will always be some who
would not accept the virtual world as an end all and explore beyond it.

------
greenlblue
Is he trying to be funny or is he making an actual argument?

