109 replies to this topic

[Chip]

Maybe we can trade some trinkets and blankets to the natives, oh, money, we still are doing that token thing, and, ah, wait, I guess there aren't any natives. Oh well...

Hey

"Civilization HO!"
as quoted from a firesign theater album.

[Chip]

Here is a site that appears to be quite decent concerning solar sails including latest news. Did you know a solar sail craft is scheduled to lift off (a largely Russian project) this spring? Get this, it is supposed to be launched from a Russian nuclear sub March 1. I wonder why they chose a nuclear sub for launching.

http://www.solarsails.info/index.html

Chip

[treonsverdery]

Yay Terraforming terraforming is wonderful

Lazarus writes
While I am in favor of off world development Mac I am also in favor of modifying ourselves to adapt to marine environments so that we could offer a competitive opportunity for human habitat just offshore

Id like to live like a mermaid with a big blob o water as an environment As a mermaid the ecosystem is just water light n organisms You like

[Lazarus Long]

Finally someone gets it.

Humans are such stubborn, difficult, primitive, and generally undisciplined thinkers. If they hadn't become so dependent on sound bites of late maybe they would more rapidly get the ten thousand words inspired by every picture. [alien]

A nanotech skin that offers environmental protection, biomimetic muscular enhancement, O2 re-breathing ability and blood-gas equalization might allow even land lubbers to play true aquatics for extended periods to great depths.

Building under the sea doesn't mean that everyone has to live IN the water all the time but it does offer more than double the available dwelling area for habitat just on the continental shelves offshore.

This could also be made available in such a manner that means that people can come and go and the Earth could sustain the next population doubling without the probable holocaust that *just* dwelling on the land is likely to cause. This is also predicated on changing how we use and generate power but the ocean offers all the same things we are dependent on now and even more.

It would also give some of us a far better chance of getting prepped for really going off-world as it is the *most* alien environment we can reasonably safely train in short of actually going off-world. )

[Lazarus Long]

Oh BTW, did I mention that the same kinds of Environmental Protection and Enhancement suits that we might theoretically develop and test in marine environments could also improve the current state of EVA suits to improve the ability of an astronaut to stay on task for ten to twenty times what current tech offers.

It is amazing how much cross applicability you can develop once you tear down the walls of the boxes surrounding many of our ideas.

[Lazarus Long]

Here is a site that appears to be quite decent concerning solar sails including latest news. Did you know a solar sail craft is scheduled to lift off (a largely Russian project) this spring? Get this, it is supposed to be launched from a Russian nuclear sub March 1. I wonder why they chose a nuclear sub for launching.

http://www.solarsails.info/index.html

Chip

I believe the Europeans launched a solar sail test not long ago too and the Japanese also have one in the works if I remember off hand.

Oh and as for the Russians launching from a sub I can imagine a number of good reasons for that and some are political but one good technical reason might involve seeking an equatorial launch trajectory.

[treonsverdery]

Theres a new between planets energy architecture It goes with two ideas from New scientist magazine Nuclear isomers with photon teleportation Youve read that directing high energy photons at fissile material is able to make them many times more radioactive, that theres even a USAF plane that uses High energy photon irradiated Ha to fly well the wonderful thing is that combine photon teleportation with that humans are able to make noncontact thermal gradients, new kinds of ion engines, even nonlocalized no specific critical mass breeder reactors Visualize an ion drive then visualize that ion drive with Ha Ni Th that is catalyzed to plasma temps at a 70 times photon energy input ratio thats like 70 times as energetic per unit mass noncontact thermal gradients are an even more powerful terraforming technology if theres a big chunk of dirty ice that you want to move you use photon teleportation to catalyze the highly ordinary Th with perhaps additional material to be highly thermal thats a reaction motor The fun thing about granite is that it has sufficient Th radioactivity to melt if released rapidly noncatalyzed Th rate is gradual thus granite just sits there. wonderful fun is that with photon teleportation 3d structures kind of like an allium are capable of being made that focus catalyzed radioactivity on a center creating anything from a jettable liquid center to a nuclear transmutation zone Yay that means you can make water from rock The idea that a catalytic photon teleportation breeder reactor is manufacturable is manufacturable is right there visualize little blobs of Ha on a SiGeAs photon teleporter all mildly warm, at arbitrary distances from each other with a dynamically changeable focus at sun temperature. its the GRL

Treon

[macdog]

Treon

First off, punctuation is your friend.

Secondly, I really do like the idea of teleportation drives to manipulate cosmic objects. I'm wondering if you heard of that from work someone else is doing? Is there a link?

Mac

[Lazarus Long]

I have a suggestion for you Treon if you are using a translator. First off remember that some of those programs are very limited and will create profound errors associated with grammar and punctuation. In that sense Mac's suggestion is quite valid.

Second, these are forums and not chats so a little more work is involved when communicating. I suspect English is not your first language and that is quite alright but as such it will help to proof yourself more and try and keep what you say as simple as possible. Also something I often learned the hard way when becoming facile in a second language is that you cannot always 'transliterate', as the ideas and word usages don't necessarily translate just because the text does.

My reference to chats is because 'slang' that is common within chats will only make things more confusing when introduced as mixed text in a more complex format like this that is additionally confused by a lack of punctuation and randomized errors.

[Karomesis]

treon, I myself can empathise with your grammatical plight. Orthodoxy is the arch nemesis of creativity.

Although I suppose for the present time we can suffer communicating using the primitive methods available to us.

On terraforming, I think that the problem is sufficiently removed from our current quandary as to be unworthy of our immediate consideration. With the amount of material resources being consumed by individuals steadily in decline,the amount of resources left for consumption will sustain our numbers at present. [glasses]

I feel that with the advent of our new freinds AI in the next few decades the terraforming of alpha centauri will be similar to setting up a tent at a local campground. Forgive my sarcasm but the problems we find particularly perplexing, such as terraforming planets will not present the same difficulties to AI. [thumb]

That being said,I do not posess the biological expertise to properly identify the problems associated with the creation of an ecosystem suitable for humans. Of the very limited knowledge I have gained from the perusal of scientific journals none is sufficient for our present discussion. sorry I couldn't be of more help macdog.

[macdog]

karo, though I take your points my fiercest objection is that letting the AI's do all the work won't be any fun!

There's also the not insignificant matter that we may have to get to work on terraforming a planet in the very near future. Namely, planet Earth. I call you attention to the billions being spent in South Florida right now (where I live) to restore the Everglades. Not so long ago, the Fed used to pay people to drain the swamps and raise cattle on the land, which turned out to a horrible idea. Florida has grown so fast that now we need the Everglades back for, among other things, the storage of water to process for drinking. Having just gone through 4 hurricanes last fall, we also got a tough lesson in the value of those swamps as places for all that precipitation to drain to, otherwise it makes mobile home parks look like a really, realy cheap version of Venice. There's also the matter of restoring the mangrove and seagrass ecosystem in the Gulf Coast. Now at first this was done to try and help the manatee, which I'm all for, but it turned out we really didn't understand how valuable those mangroves and seagrasses were until they weren't there. Phosphate leaching around any urban center is a problem (runoff from fertilizers and soaps) but a large percentage of the phosphate used industrially in the US is actually mined straight out of the ground around here. In other words, all of Florida's runoff is phosphate rich, whether or not it's near an urban center. The mangroves and seagrasses used a lot of that phosphate for growth, and when they were gone suddenly the whole coast on the Gulf became clogged with algae. Some VERY rich people who'd spent millions for a mansion on the glittering white beaches of the warm subtropical seas couldn't stand the constant smell of rotting algae. So action was taken, and right now we're managing to restore about a third of a square mile a year (most of it of course, near those beachfront mansions).

I'm also not entirely sure where you get the idea that use of material resources is steadily in decline. Yes, in the west we've managed to stabilize our water consumption, and the rate of the destruction of certain forestlands (tropical and temperate) is slowing down, but consumption rates overall are going up. Even taking the population of India and China off of bicycles and putting them onto fuel efficient scooter is still an increase in consumption. Someone once told me (and I'm not sure of the efficacy of this, but it does make you think) that if everyone in Eastern Europe wanted to eat 5 banannas a year, the entirety of the South American continent would have to be dedicated to it's production. Also, the simple mathematics of an increasing population means that no matter how much consumption is reduced per capita, total consumption rates are still going to go up. There's also a lot of things we're simply running out of: good topsoil, fossil fuels (and even ethanol and hydrogen are processed USING fossil fuels, so sorry that ain't the answer) and the biodiversity we've always been dependent on to return wild genes to extant pops. of farm stock (or new species altogether, you couldn't always get kiwi fruit).

Waiting for this AI God to come solve all our problems is also aesthetically unnappealing to me as I believe it to be deeply intellectually lazy.

[susmariosep]

Congratulations, Macdog, for a brilliantly written and insightful essay.

I wonder why Treon can't or won't write as you do. But then everyone has his talents and limitations as apportioned by God or nature.

Waiting for this AI God to come solve all our problems is also aesthetically unnappealing to me as I believe it to be deeply intellectually lazy.

I guess I have to take exception to that ending statement or thrown-in remark of yours. Intellectual laziness in this respect is a well-earned luxury from perseverance in the employment of intelligence to produce the AI God.

And to think it seemed to me that you were one of those who scolded me for talking about the drafting of a new God better than the one in the Old Testament, for this latter is not better than you or me in the moralistic sense; and certainly not in the intelligence sense either. A primitive God fashioned by a primitive race with their primitive knowledge and a brutal mind.


Go to that thread on inferior gods, if you have not been visiting lately, I am going to publish my findings from my studies of you and Stranger.

Regards.

Susma

[Lazarus Long]

I wonder why Treon can't or won't write as you do. But then everyone has his talents and limitations as apportioned by God or nature.

I am going to publish my findings from my studies of you and Stranger.

Susma why do you insist on talking about the various posters rather than the topic alone?

You have made reference to one poster almost a dozen times in at least a half dozen different threads and not once was it relevant to the topic under discussion.

You are treating investigatory discussion by *personalizing* it and this can be understood as one important basis for the loss of objectivity that separates scholastic and philosophical pursuit from mere gossip. They are not the same and while complex subjects do not lose validity when expressed in their simplest form so as to be made comprehensible to those that might go on from that beginning point to learn of their greater depth and nuance, it is not valid conversely that by somehow addressing the writers' flaws (or strengths) you are actually discussing the subject.

Elsewhere you brought up the difficulties of addressing the validity of philosophy in the lexicon (language) of the common vernacular and ideas thus making it *appealing* while maintaining legitimacy.

Perhaps it is your perspective on this subject and the rules of rational discourse that are the greatest obstacles to understanding you face rather than any specific limitations inherent in the rational analysis of ethics and complexities of thought.

[susmariosep]

Dear Lazarus:

As I study people from their messages and do it frankly but with all courtesy and civil language, I am also open to any studies by others of myself and explicitly invite people to do so.

Of course that is not a reason for studying people but just to give it a shall we call it level-playing field.

Read the papers today and everyday, specially in the most important of pages, wherever we can find the editorials, opinions, and commentaries, are they not in the last analysis about studies of people.

Take this contribution yesterdy from a noted economist, if I am not mistaken, he is very often making study assessments of people in the Bush administration, as he at the same time also delves into the issues and policies pursued by them. He calls them hypocrites, cranks, and scoundrels -- a good number of the important ones, that is.

You see, the world as we know it and live in it is mankind. Whereas mankind studies everything, it is a rare individual who studies mankind himself, and even less for a man himself to fathom his own self and inner workings in all honesty.

For me the last frontier for knowledge is man himself, at least for every individual in regard to himself and for him to study every other fellowman, in the pursuit of how to live with and deal with fellow humans, who are the most complicated of living organisms and most destructive, for being seemingly the most intelligent and creative nonetheless, and the tragedy.

I also contribute views on questions that interest me; I do not really write on nothing but pretend to do studies of people here.

If someone tells me to not study him from his messages, then I will abstain from doing so.

But when people put their ideas in public for the whole world to read and to interact with, then he is in effect inviting people to study not only his ideas but and most predominantly and even I would maintain the only motivating drive, is so that fellow humans can give their attention to them and that is in effect study them.

Susma

[Karomesis]

macdog, with technological pace accelerating at ever greater speed, information has been steadily increasing,the use of resources in conjunction with this change has continued to decline. For example there are many files on the internet that only exist in their web form. Also the change from vinyl records to cds and now the logical conclusion to purely digital music existing only in its digital form.In the future I belive that information or the creation of it will be the only useful currency.

My apologies for miscomunicating my initial remarks, I ment per capita consumption is in steady decline along with the value of information itself becoming more and more valuble. Information takes up only as much room as is needed for its storage and transmisson.

The climatic change that has occured since time immemorial will continue to dominate us until we reach a stage of control over our planet. And then outward, starting with your initial statement concerning terraforming, but this is where we differ, I beleive that terraformation will occur as a result of human need for exploration,not neccesity.But i geuss only time will serve to authenticate my ramblings of an AI "God".

[macdog]

karo,

I find it ironic that just today one of my professors noted that since the college moved to a nearly entire web-based formatting for announcements and registration, that the amount of paper usage has gone up, not down. I say that not to be combative but only because as I stated, it strikes me as ironic.

I hope I did not define your AI reference as "ramblings", though I can understand why you would see it that way. To be truthful, when people talk specifically about the Singularity, they are usually erudite and well informed. That is not my objection. My objection is that so many topics are dismissed out-of-hand simply because, "the AI will solve it". Those of us who don't particularly care about the coming of AI, with all its talk of immanentizing the Eschaton, can sometimes be treated in these forums as dolts who are simply bothering the rest of you. I have become reactionary in my objections to this mindset, and I do need to temper that, but conversely so could all you singularions. I once heard a prominent member of this group refer to all of human affairs as being of "bacteria level complexity", which leads one to wonder if the Singularity factions plans to do away with us all with little more thought than one would use in sanitizing a toilet bowl.

Also, I don't think the issue is one of "control over our planet", you should know eneough of chaos theory to understand that that is unlikely for even the most advanced intelligences. Perhaps even God, should he ever be bothered to actually exist. We need to learn more about harmony with change, which is how we survived (and thrived) through the climate change of the Pliestocene, not through domination.

You needn't apologize for anything karomesis, not on my account, but given the discussion I thought some clarification was in order. I would also note that information does tend to take up plenty of room in storage and transmission. The existence of banannas, and of using fossil fuels for internal combustion engines has taken up an inconcievable amount of room. Quite literally, that information has taken up enough room to chemically alter the composition of the atmosphere. That's a lot of room!

[Karomesis]

macdog your points are well taken, What is ironic to me, is that on the surface it would appear we are dissimilar in more ways than not, But I beleive our opinions share an underlying similarity.

You enjoy being animalistic, as do I, I merely see the coming technological change as a means to an end, a conduit through which my pleasures and sensations can increase a thousandfold. This is what I refer to as the Plesure principle, all events in existence of a concious being are based upon this.

Have you read the age of spiritual machines by kurzweil? It's a great book with many references made to the material we discussed. I was refering to my "ramblings" because I find self depriciation an art form,Not to be combative. I also understand your point regarding harmonious change, It just frustrates and angers me [ang] when 150,000 people die from a disaster that I feel could have been prevented, or at least somewhat alleiviated through technological interventions.

[macdog]

karo,

I don't know how many of my other posts you've read, but after I graduate from college I plan to go into disaster management. I too am just torn to pieces regarding the tsunami. I think once their done counting it will be closer to 250,000, and a professor I was speaking with today agreed.

As far as tech-intervention in this case, I'm not sure how much it could have helped. An early warning system could have saved a lot of lives in Sri Lanka, India, and maybe Thailand, but the wave hit Bandah Aceh so quickly after the quake (a frikkin' 9.1!!!) that I'm not sure if they would have had enough time. There's also no presently known to safely dissipate that kind of energy. What could have made a real difference would have been tall structures of immense strength. In many of these towns and villages where the people lived, there was nothing but debris, and a Mosque. The Mosques survived because they are built to last, and frequently are constructed of numerous pillars(which allows the water to flow around them, rather than take the full brunt of the force) to support a massive roof. Unfortunately, the roofs are designed for the glorification of God, and not for people to climb up on to. I think the money that could be spent on an early warning system would be better spent on structures along the lines I have described but with flat roofs. Tsunamis are rare events, though less so in that part of the world, but the monsoons and their associated flooding are annual. Of course, we are talking about people living in crushing poverty, who are sometimes just happy to have a thatched roof over their heads, much less a story and a half tall house set up on steel reinforced pillars.

It frustrates me too, but hey, chaos really ain't so theoretical.

I look forward to future conversations, and if I am ever excessively flip or rude (as I have been known to be here) just smack me.

[Kalepha]

macdog, what makes you think superintelligence can be avoided? Who’s going to stop it from happening? If it can’t be prevented, what’s the next best thing (besides suicide)?

I doubt it’s terraforming. ;oþ

[Lazarus Long]

That is a separate subject Nate definitely worth taking to the Singularity Forum please. Just as I have been contemplating taking my response to Susma to a PM.

ON a separate note about calamity, warning, and prevention, that is precisely one of the important motives for going after asteroids first. It is doable and needed as we are able to effect the tech of manipulating them starting now. If we take this road we are also able to eliminate this major and proven threat to life on Earth.

Also Nate if one of the big ones hits before a superintelligence forms I guarantee it won't be forming on this world for another few tens of millions of years (if at all). The opportunity (and risks) for a superintelligence will take a very long time to arise again and it is all about the timing.

[Kalepha]

Fair enough, Laz.

In regards to asteroid threats, haven't the models already been developed to divert them, so that now it's just a matter of implementation?

[Lazarus Long]

In regards to asteroid threats, haven't the models already been developed to divert them, so that now it's just a matter of implementation?

That is not clear Nate. The basic models are within our technological grasp but clearly still require a level of commitment that if requiring the actual sighting the threat first, may be way too late to implement.

It is not too dissimilar in principle to what we just witnessed with the Asian tsunami, which should be a real eye opener on the issues of addressing large scale threats.

The point I am suggesting is one of pragmatics. Threats like the Singularity are still too vague and hypothetical to form a full fledged strategy about, let alone tactics. (I fully expect a bunch of PM's from our friends at the *Sing Inst* for that one ) )

Something like the asteroid threat is like early humans taming the burning forest and gaining control of fire. The threat is real and demonstrable, facing us sooner than we should find comfortable, and we avert our attention at our peril. All while ignoring an opportunity that may contribute far more than most realize.

That doesn't mean we should ignore the hypothetical, it just means put our efforts where we can expect the most return and take it one step at a time. We might not always have that luxury, (we may not even have it now) but I prefer addressing the problems we can fix, to squandering too much effort on the problems we barely have a handle on.

Conversely it is ironic and I am quite aware of the fact: That which we do not know, can and often will kill us.

[Kalepha]

Unfortunately, Laz, it’s difficult for most individuals to keep tabs on every existential threat, let alone being proactive in doing something about each and every one. As a result, we make choices based on who’s already working on what, our level of trust in those who are working on those threats where our void isn’t missed, and how we’d prefer not to go out. The way I see it, it’s impossible for pragmatics to play any more than a partial role.

[macdog]

Nate, I don't think superintelligence is "avoidable" as you put it. I'm certainly not going to get in anyone's way whose trying to do it, I just want to make sure the superintelligence advocates don't try and do away with the rest of us. When I live my life as a 300 year old arboreal post-human with sensors spread throughout an entire forest, I'll probably be calling you to see if you can help me process data for repair from the most recent heavy weather event.

Did anybody else hear about the bolide that exploded over Darwin, Australia like 3-5 months ago? I heard it on late night radio a while back, which I know ain't the most reliable source, but still...society is only becoming more aware of the threats and opportunities "out there". I expect that will continue. I also wonder if we're heading into a period of statistical clustering with natural disaster events. Statistical clustering does indeed happen, and it wouldn't surprise me (well, actually I'm sure it would) if we had a Tunguska like event in the next few decades. It's much more likely that we'd lose a major city, or even a minor one, than that we get with a rock that wipes everything off of the face of the Earth that weighs more 50lbs.

Hey, isn't anyone else excited by the Hyugens landing? Fantastic photos! Water so profoundly frozen it is essentially a hard mineral. Vast oceans full of complex hydrocarbons! Man, I bet George W. would love to sink a well in that reserve! Even he might be able to make money doing that!

Nate, I'm going to make a posting in the immortalism forum somewhat related to what you asked me, check it out.

[Kalepha]

Hopefully the current efforts going into Friendly AI and other AGI-oriented projects will be either successful or irrevelant, not a failure. I don't yet have enough information to place bets. What I do know however is that if they are successful, any picture I have now of what my lifestyle or goals might be like post-Singularity is not worth having. Superintelligence will completely change my state of being. If we are gravity-cancelling, morphological Jupiter brains in vacuum space, weather would be irrelevant.

[macdog]

weather would be irrelevant to you, but I find weather appealing. And I plan to live on a planet, not a server. My thought in the statement above is that biological post-humans could at times turn to uploads to help crunch some numbers. But again we return to this idea that we just shouldn't have any independent thoughts until the singularity, which is ridiculous, or that the uploads will simply sterilize biologics like vermin, which is evil.

And as Lazarus said, we are really off topic here. Start a thread somewhere else and I'll be happy to try and debate this stuff with you, though it seems like when you get into this kind of mood, there's no talking to you.

[Kalepha]

macdog, I'm not sure why you take such offense to these things. In no way am I being patronizing. Please make the distinction between offense and harm. If you knew me, you would recognize that transhumanistic notions don't really excite me. All I am is an adapter now; and one way to adapt is to accept the likelihood that the arrival of superintelligence will impose forces such that we have to completely change our attitudes about energy consumption. Biology is too sloppy and uneconomical. We will need to abandon our affinity with it if we are to survive.

Just because I state likely scenarios doesn't mean I'm in a state of ecstasy or that I experience any sadistic pleasure from having attitudes that trivialize yours. Even my attitudes are always trivialized the more I investigate transhumanism. It's something to deal with or die.

[macdog]

Biology is actually fantastically economical, and given the literally billions of things that have to go right every second of every day to stay alive, I wouldn't exactly call it sloppy either.

Biology has been perfecting itself on this planet for billions of years. The idea that computer science will, in the course of a single century, make biology entirely obsolete is profoundly unlikely. Maybe when you've actually got a brain the size of a planet, you'll have a greater appreciation for biology.

Since you've rather insisted on going off topic here (and yes I do take offense at having my ideas trivialized, you don't see me invading the Singularity forum do you), then I would have to point that this faith (what else could you call it?) in ultimate ascendancy of AI is precisely the same mental model used by people when they say that Earth is just a testing ground before we go to our real home in Heaven (or Hell), or that some people (usually those with nordic features) are the descendants of perfect beings from another planet. The most frightening aspect of your worldview is that it may be achievable to some degree. When the AI starts loading up the trains to involuntary uploading centers full of sloppy and uneconomical human beings, you're going to a have a real fight on your hands. I don't care if the AI lacks sadistic pleasure or not! For the moment you could stand to listen to ideas that might not excite you, because as I've said to you several times, if some of the prevailing attitudes I sense from the uploaders continue, your going to have mobs in the street smashing every computer they can get their hands. It is time to stop thinking that you know best for everyone, that is how the worst mistakes are made. Further, as both Lazarus and I have asked you to stay on topic in this forum and I created a new thread where we could discuss this issue, I can only describe your insistence on doing so anyway as innapropriate proselytizing. As unwelcome (and no less wacky) than Mormons or Jehovah's witnesses knocking on my door.

[Kalepha]

Actually, it is on topic. A topic on terraforming that includes questioning its basic premises is still the same topic on terraforming. Just because the totality of ideas under the class “terraforming” might make one uncomfortable, it doesn’t change the statuses of its constituent sub-classes.

You also misrepresent my position and attack the presumption that I have 100 percent rational confidence in how I perceive the implications of superintelligence. You also mistakenly presume that I’m interested in conglomerate psynets, rather than in the absolute freedom of individual cognitions. It’s only that such freedom won’t be a luxury most probably until the advent of ontotech, i.e., technology with the capacity to re-engineer the fabric of reality.

Although reason can’t completely precede sentiment, it can carry more weight in preceding sentiment than it would if sentiment preceded reason. With you, sentiment seems to precede reason, which constructs the premises that give rise to behavior whose attitudinal contents likely will, for better or for worse, be forced to change.

You shouldn’t mistake what I say for proselytizing or presume that I proceed with dogmatic foundations. Everything is probabilities. Just because I might want two flipped coins to have an outcome of HH 90 percent of the time doesn’t change the probability that such an outcome will only occur a fourth of the time. I either hang on to my desire and suffer a violation of it, or I change my desire to expecting a one-fourth probability so that it’s impossible for it to be violated.

You misconstrue my choosing not to suffer as a sentimental attack toward you, rather than as a rational decision. By thus misconstruing, you threaten abstractions with violence, which is strange.