
On the Great Filter, existential threats, and griefers - cstross
http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2015/04/on-the-great-filter-existentia.html
======
digi_owl
"I don't rule out the possibility of building robust self-sufficient off-world
habitats. The problem I see is that it's vastly more expensive than building
an off-world outpost and shipping rations there, as we do with Antarctica --
and our economic cost/benefit framework wouldn't show any obvious return on
investment for self-sufficiency."

I think this is what eventually acts as the great filter.

In that by the time it is cost benefit approved to do something, the resources
have already been depleted on something that would rake in more tokens in the
short run.

and unless we manage to blow the atmosphere away, eventually nature moves in
and covers everything up (what is uninhabitable for modern man don't seem the
phase the rest of the animal kingdom much).

As such, the blue spheres we spot may be places that has come and gone
already. But the only way to know for sure is to go there, and that is highly
unlikely to ever happen.

Damn it, we keep finding new ruins in the Amazon constantly (never mind
various deserts etc). It does not take long for nature to reclaim a region
once civilization has gone bye bye.

------
macromaniac
All of these HN alternate explanations are listed and explained by Tim Urban
here: [http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-
paradox.html](http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html)

------
weeksie
Here's my answer to the Fermi paradox: simulation. And not because we're in
one (all respect to Nick Bostrom) but because when a civ reaches singularity,
there's no point in expanding because the reality that it/they can live in
from within a small efficient simulation machine is safer and cheaper than the
prospect of interstellar expansion.

~~~
Sapient
This has been my favourite explanation since I read Stross' book, Accelerando.
The common argument I get against it is along the lines of "humans being too
curious to abandon the real universe".

Of course simulation in this case doesn't answer the problem of Von Neuman
probes and the like, as its still perfectly reasonable to expect a simulated
race to have some physical presence and desire to explore the universe,
however since we recognize the risks of these kinds of things so long before
we even have the capability of launching our own VN probes, perhaps the
vanishingly unlikely scenario is an advanced civilization actually doing it
themselves?

~~~
weeksie
I don't necessarily disagree. I think that there's a likelihood that Von
Neuman probes are a possible thing. But are they inevitable? Perhaps they are
unlikely. What if the technology required to create reliable VNPs was only in
the grasp of singularity civilizations due to the (perhaps) strong AI
requirements?

There's this line, I think, where a civilization would look at the divergence
that would happen over interstellar distances and realize that they weren't
propagating themselves, but at worst, creating more rivals and existential
threats for themselves.

It's easy enough for someone to make the right decision and turn all notions
of intergalactic conquest into lived-out virtual reality fever dreams.

~~~
Sapient
Yep, I would agree that it would be very unlikely that a civilization capable
of launching them, WOULD launch them. We are nowhere close to being able to
build these probes ourselves, but already understand the dangers of doing so.
Even assuming that VN probes WERE launched by some civs, who is to say that
they aren't stopped by other even more advanced civs before they can become a
problem?

Overall, my feeling is that there are 2 things which cause the 'dead' universe
we see.

1\. The Great Filter is the evolution of intelligence. Since we are here, its
easy for us to assume the evolution of sentience is normal, but the dinosaurs
were around for almost 200m years and got nowhere. And if not for a string of
lucky events, we wouldn't even be here, wondering these things right now.

2\. Advanced civilizations prefer simulation and dont need to colonize the
universe at all, I think this would be even more likely if the first point is
true, since once you understand the physics of the universe, see that its a
cold dead place and you are bound by its physical laws, simulation has a lot
more to offer. I would love to invent my own universes, simulate them, and be
able to watch and manipulate them with omnipotence.

~~~
weeksie
Makes perfect sense to me. And re: simulation—absolutely. The rest of the
universe would be, in comparison, pretty boring.

Also, I have to pick up Accelerondo. Sounds like a good one.

------
marcosdumay
So, if sterilizers are common, why don't we see them?

A Matrioshka Brain has a perfectly recognizable emission spectrum, we'd have
recognized a few already if they were common. If they use plain style Von
Neumann probes, why aren't they here, and why don't we see their reproduction
remains?

~~~
venomsnake
Space is big ...

~~~
rational-future
Not that big. Advanced technology, like replicators and a few million years
are enough to reach galaxies far-far away.

~~~
venomsnake
Everything that is reliable for a couple of million of years will be heavy. If
it is heavy - it will be slow. And we have that joyous dark energy lurking in
the intergalactic space - traversing it may not be the easiest thing in the
world.

~~~
kamaal
I thought dark energy is something that doesn't interact with ordinary matter.

~~~
ajuc
Except through gravity

------
dash2
Here's an alternative resolution to the Fermi paradox: we haven't heard from
aliens, because they are communicating in ways that we are insufficiently
advanced to listen for.

Analogy: in 1500, even if we'd thought to listen for aliens, we would not have
been able to build radio telescopes.

Perhaps any sensible alien civilization communicates using, say, quantum
entanglement. The moment we develop this technology and start listening, a
cheery message will come from Alpha Centauri: "what took you guys so long?"

~~~
rational-future
Not much of a resolution. If our progress continues to accelerate with same
rate as of the last 10K years, in 100K years we'll have the capability to
change completely the structure of our galaxy. Why can't we see any such
grand-scale projects from other civs?

~~~
marktangotango
One explanation is that the extrapolation of 'progress' to 'change completely
the structure of our galaxy' is false. Just because we've gone from point A to
point B in 10k years doesn't mean we'll ever get to point C, no matter however
many years. Ie either altering the structure of the galaxy is impossible (as
lack of evidence would suggest) or progressing to that level would take even
longer, such that no civilization has reached it yet.

Just playing devils advocate here.

~~~
randallsquared
The impossibility of changing the structure of the galaxy implies some
exciting new physics that would explain why.

------
jacquesm
One very simple anti-great-filter theory is that we're simply the first.
Someone has to be by definition, it's a small chance but it definitely is a
possibility.

~~~
venomsnake
Depending on how the universe works we only need to be the first in the galaxy
(the chance for which is not that low). Also we can just be in the galactic
backwater. there are places on earth we know nothing about. So the idea that
we are in a part of the galaxy equivalent of the deep amazonian jungle is also
not far fetched.

And the galaxy may be brimming with life - just so alien that we cannot
recognize each other.

~~~
WildUtah
"Far out in the uncharted backwaters of the unfashionable end of the western
spiral arm of the Galaxy lies a small unregarded yellow sun. Orbiting this at
a distance of roughly ninety-two million miles is an utterly insignificant
little blue green planet whose ape-descended life forms are so amazingly
primitive that they still think Apple watches are a pretty neat idea."

------
ajuc
Instead of one big filter there can be huge number of small filters.

Take a few dozens independent 90% filters together and you got the expected
success number in the "1 per observable universe" territory.

------
hellbanner
Where's the website that has a list of existential threats listed?

------
platz
Worried about griefer Von Neumann probes today

