From: Yedidya Weil (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Apr 16 2007 - 13:45:25 MDT
Just because no life reach 'uplift' the Universe is pointless?
Perhaps we are a simulation to see under what conditions uplift can occur, for gods-in-training. Perhaps this experiment is needed for optimal design of Universes. Or just for fun of creation. Why isn't this as much 'point' as if uplift were achieved?
----- Original Message ----
From: Jeff Herrlich <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:21:32 PM
Subject: Re: Existential Risk and Fermi's Paradox
The odds may be so heavily stacked against us that the probability of success is only 0.0000000000001% for any given civilization (or worse). That doesn't mean that we can't possibly be that one civilization. And it doesn't mean we shouldn't try. What if the goal is possible (albeit very remotely possible) but all civilizations decide to give up prematurely. That would ultimately make this an entirely pointless Universe.
I'm starting to believe more and more, that a very large "fraction" of the paradox, is that an evolved intelligence like us is simply extremely rare in this Universe.
"kevin.osborne" <email@example.com> wrote:
recipe for: a little future shock
proposition: take the Anissimov/Yudkowsky view on the seriousness of
Friendly A.I and other existential risks as a given.
empirical observation: as per Fermi. the aether is silent and
lifeless. all other intelligent species on all other near-space
life-supporting worlds have failed to reach uplift.
theory: the galaxy is dead and void. existential risk has proven
lethal and/or progress-suppressive in all prior cases.
prediction: our chances of reaching/surpassing/outliving the
Singularity are negligible -> nil.
Ahhh...imagining that irresistible "new car" smell?
new cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 23 2013 - 04:01:31 MDT