United Nations Alien Ambassador

[Tatarin]

Not really new news, but:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1315336/United-Nations-appoint-space-ambassador-act-contact-aliens-visiting-Earth.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

The great question now is, why?

[Widerstand]

I guess I knew once, but I don't remember. Sorry.:crying:

[x371322]

Well I've read that she and the UN have denied any such "promotion." Not sure what's really going on, I've not read a lot into it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

In April though Professor Stephen Hawking warned that the alien contact, if it ever comes, may not be as friendly as has been hoped.

In a documentary, the 68-year-old scientist said he imagined aliens arriving in 'massive ships' and could try to colonise Earth and plunder the planet's resources.

If this statement from Hawking is true, which it possibly isn't since this is the Daily Fail we are talking about, then it is still an utterly ridiculous statement for a well-known scientist to make.

Just what resources does Hawking think the primitive Earthlings have that a star-faring civilisation would not be able to find elsewhere or make in plentiful supply for themselves?

[Q]

If this statement from Hawking is true, which it possibly isn't since this is the Daily Fail we are talking about, then it is still an utterly ridiculous statement for a well-known scientist to make.

Just what resources does Hawking think the primitive Earthlings have that a star-faring civilisation would not be able to find elsewhere or make in plentiful supply for themselves?

Hollywood and a sense for theatrical drama.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Hollywood and a sense for theatrical drama.

I did think of one possibility, although I'm afraid it's not a pleasant one for us: Alien Evangelists, spreading the most holy words of [guttural noise] to the benighted heathens of the Orion Arm.

Fuck. Now I'm scared.

[Omi]

If the aliens will react to the discovering of a new civilisation the same way Europeans reacted when they spread out across the globe, we will be in deep aliendung.

[Ovi]

If this statement from Hawking is true, which it possibly isn't since this is the Daily Fail we are talking about, then it is still an utterly ridiculous statement for a well-known scientist to make.

Just what resources does Hawking think the primitive Earthlings have that a star-faring civilisation would not be able to find elsewhere or make in plentiful supply for themselves?
Maybe those aliens have the technology to travel fast enough to reach us, but not to make other planets livable (what we would call terraforming); and maybe their own planet, which they might have fucked up, was just like the Earth. Let's now hope that such an advanced civilization won't be living in the same primitive social order that we are, e.g. capitalism and that unlike certain human leftists, those aliens believe that conserving even more primitive species, such as us, is important, even if it brings them no economic benefit.

[ZeroNowhere]

Stop proselytizing.

[Quail]

Weird. It's not like we're on the brink of making contact with any aliens.. but considering the source, I'm going to take the article with a large handful of salt :lol:

You would hope that by the time an alien planet became capable of space travel that could reach us, the inhabitants would be living in a communist-type society, where they value the lives of other organisms.

[Tatarin]

If this statement from Hawking is true, which it possibly isn't since this is the Daily Fail we are talking about, then it is still an utterly ridiculous statement for a well-known scientist to make.

No?:



Existence and nature of extraterrestrial life

Hawking has indicated that he is almost certain that alien life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_life) exists in other parts of the universe and uses a mathematical basis for his assumptions. "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational. The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like." He believes alien life not only certainly exists on planets but perhaps even in other places, like within stars or even floating in outer space. He also warns that a few of these species might be intelligent and threaten Earth. Contact with such species might be devastating for humanity.[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_hawkins#cite_note-28) "If aliens visit us, the outcome would be much as when Columbus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus) landed in America, which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans," he said. He advocated that, rather than try to establish contact, man should try to avoid contact with alien life forms.[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_hawkins#cite_note-29)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_hawkins

[Quail]

His conclusion that alien life must exist outside of this planet is based on maths, but that quote doesn't say where he got his ideas for what aliens might be like from, other than human history. But whatever other life there is, if it got to a stage where it was capable of travelling to this planet, their technology and probably their society would be far more advanced than ours, in which case I think there would be a higher probability of them respecting other life. If our society got to the stage where we could travel through space, I would imagine (or hope) we would have established communism by then.

That's just my opinion anyway.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Maybe those aliens have the technology to travel fast enough to reach us, but not to make other planets livable (what we would call terraforming);

That just compounds the problem. Traveling at large fractions of C takes titanic amounts of energy, and if you've got enough energy to do that, you have enough energy to keep a planet habitable through sheer brute force!

Plausible but quite possibly un-physical FTL travel methods are even worse - both Alcubierre drives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive) and traversable wormholes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole#Traversable_wormholes) require truly obscene levels of energy - we're talking stellar outputs here at the very least, and some calculations have the energy requirement be greater than the total mass-energy of the universe.

Interstellar travel is a lot harder than you may have been lead to believe.


and maybe their own planet, which they might have fucked up, was just like the Earth. Let's now hope that such an advanced civilization won't be living in the same primitive social order that we are, e.g. capitalism and that unlike certain human leftists, those aliens believe that conserving even more primitive species, such as us, is important, even if it brings them no economic benefit.

I think it's far more likely that for the vast majority of extraterrestrial civilisations anywhere near our level of development (this means everything from the Bronze Age to the cusp of the Singularity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity) and everything in between), hostile action against us would range from the utterly impractical to the needlessly wasteful.

But to be honest, it's not the beings near our level that we should really be concerned about. You see, the sheer vastness of time ensures that most intelligent species in the Milky Way will be Apes or Angels (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aa.html#apesorangels):

"Sir Arthur C. Clarke made a famous observation about space explorers discovering aliens. If one considers the millions of years of pre-history, and the rapid technological advancement occurring now, if you apply that to a hypothetical alien race, one can figure the probabilities of how advanced the explorers will find them. The conclusion is "we will find apes or angels, but not men."

Why? Consider the history of Planet Earth. Let the height of the Empire State building represent the 5 billion year life of Terra. The height of a one-foot ruler perched on top would represent the million years of Man's existence. The thickness of a dime will represent the ten thousand years of Man's civilization. And the thickness of a postage stamp will represent the 300 years of Man's technological civilization. An unknown portion above represents "pre-Singularity Man", the period up to the point where mankind hits the Singularity/evolves into a higher form/turns into angels. Say another dime. Above that would be another Empire State building, representing the latter 5 billion years of Terra's lifespan.

If you picked a millimeter of this tower at random, what would you most likely hit? One of the Empire State buildings, of course. So, assuming only one civilization develops on a planet, chances are the first-in-scout starship Daniel Boone will discover mostly planets that are currently empty of alien civilizations (but they might have an almost 50% chance to discover valuable Forerunner artifacts or other paleotechnology).

Obviously it's not the Apes we should be worried about, but rather the Angels:

"Things might get worse if a human explorer succeeded in attracting the attention of a Type III. They might react as you would, reaching for a cosmic spray-can of insecticide. Or use the explorer with the same lack of concern shown by cancer researchers to their laboratory rats. Maybe more like the lack of concern they show to the cells in their tissue cultures.

Dr. Robert A. Freitas Jr. points out that it isn't just Type III civilizations that are dangerous, it is also Type III individuals. As civilizations technologically advance, members of that civilization have access to increasing amounts of energy. For example, your average medieval peasant could never hope to own something as destructive as an AK-47 automatic rifle or a few drums of fuel oil mixed with ammonium nitrate.

Imagine a family picnic. Some ants show up. Little Billy gets annoyed, tracks the ants back to their nest, dumps a cup of kerosene onto it and lights a match. The ant nest is annihilated. Billy gets called back to the picnic for ice cream.

Imagine a gathering of Type III entities. Some human starships show up. Little Beta-Lambda gets annoyed, tracks the starships back to Earth, and seeds it with five gigatons of neutronium antimatter. Earth is annihilated. Beta-Lambda gets called back to the gathering for euphoronic frequencies"

Of course, we shouldn't let such possibilities intimidate us out of venturing forth into the Great Dark. But it will not hurt for us to tread carefully in case full-blown natural deities are stomping around.

[Tatarin]

I think the "humans-as-ants" comparison is far simplistic, and mostly based on liberal ssociety as of why humans are "so violent and only do war". It's like sci-fi series on TV when "we all" are so evil and non-concerning that "we" just take and destroy all animals and ourselves.

The comparison that humans would in the eyes of high-tech aliens be just what we view ants is a pretty big step: humans think, have different personalities, ideologies, ideas, and so on. Ants are - no offence - just ants. They are born, they work for their queen, and they die. It's not like they've ever speculated about their world around them, or if they are the only ants, or developed running water and the 8-hour working day, etc.

For the last 10,000 years we have gone from figuring out how to set fire to figuring out how to go from Earth to Mars - in comparison, ants have done what? Have they ever become more effective in what they are doing all day?

Secondly, I think high-tech beings would have more on their minds than bothering planets way off from their own area. And that is also not to forget if a Singularity can occur. If I remember correctly, the resources of this planet is beginning to thin out - if it wasn't a month ago we overreached the threshold.

[Ovi]

I think it's far more likely that for the vast majority of extraterrestrial civilisations anywhere near our level of development (this means everything from the Bronze Age to the cusp of the Singularity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity) and everything in between), hostile action against us would range from the utterly impractical to the needlessly wasteful.

But to be honest, it's not the beings near our level that we should really be concerned about. You see, the sheer vastness of time ensures that most intelligent species in the Milky Way will be Apes or Angels (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3aa.html#apesorangels):

Obviously. Which is why I was hoping that such advanced civilizations wouldn't be just as indifferent about less primitive life forms as we are.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I think the "humans-as-ants" comparison is far simplistic, and mostly based on liberal ssociety as of why humans are "so violent and only do war". It's like sci-fi series on TV when "we all" are so evil and non-concerning that "we" just take and destroy all animals and ourselves.

I don't see how value judgements such as "evil" enter into it. The aim of the comparison, as I understand it, is to attempt to illustrate the astronomically vast gulf between humans and Type III entities.


The comparison that humans would in the eyes of high-tech aliens be just what we view ants is a pretty big step: humans think, have different personalities, ideologies, ideas, and so on. Ants are - no offence - just ants. They are born, they work for their queen, and they die. It's not like they've ever speculated about their world around them, or if they are the only ants, or developed running water and the 8-hour working day, etc.

Any Type III entity would likely hold similar (although vastly more complicated) views about the relatively limited abilities and properties of humans.


For the last 10,000 years we have gone from figuring out how to set fire to figuring out how to go from Earth to Mars - in comparison, ants have done what? Have they ever become more effective in what they are doing all day?

Again, all the achievements made by humanity up to now and into the forseeable future would outclassed on a truly enormous scale by what a single Type III entity is capable of achieving.

Imagine being able to build planets, solar systems and Dyson spheres with the same ease as a typical human assembles a model aeroplane, and you'll get an inkling of an idea of their capabilities.


Secondly, I think high-tech beings would have more on their minds than bothering planets way off from their own area.

Oh, I don't know. One possible explanation for the Fermi Paradox could be that the Milky Way regularly gets swept clean of sapient beings (that is to say, Kardashev types I and II) by a a type III entity or civilisation as a form of cosmic hygiene.


And that is also not to forget if a Singularity can occur. If I remember correctly, the resources of this planet is beginning to thin out - if it wasn't a month ago we overreached the threshold.

The planet Earth has plentiful resources for human civilisation, but they are badly managed. The Singularity will occur at some point, barring threats to civilisation such as natural disasters (asteroid impact is the typical example, but it could perfectly well be a supervolcano eruption instead) or our own collective short-sightedness potentially biting us in our collective asses.


Obviously. Which is why I was hoping that such advanced civilizations wouldn't be just as indifferent about less primitive life forms as we are.

Well, ask yourself why they would give a shit. Intelligence and technological aptitude do not guarantee benevolent interest in less complex lifeforms.

[DWI]

Hawking has really gone off the deep end recently.

[Ovi]

Well, ask yourself why they would give a shit. Intelligence and technological aptitude do not guarantee benevolent interest in less complex lifeforms.
I don't get it. If you think that something that is more advanced than we are will inevitably destroy us, why on earth are you a singularitarian?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I don't get it. If you think that something that is more advanced than we are will inevitably destroy us, why on earth are you a singularitarian?

I don't think it's inevitable; the attitude of a advanced being towards us will depend on its provenance. That's why it's important that the first Strong AI is Friendly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_artificial_intelligence), since it will have a massive headstart on any AI to follow, Friendly or otherwise.

A naturally evolved advanced being, or the Strong AI creations of aliens, will not have our comfort and safety first and foremost; although that does not necessarily mean they will seek to exterminate us.

[Dr Mindbender]

i am assuming that this 'galactic ambassador' is appointed on the assumption that visiting ET's will be peaceful.

I am wondering who will co-ordinate the response should the aliens turn out to be warlike?

We have no reason to believe they would feel remorse about removing us, they may well view us as vermin in the way that we feel about rats or other pests. Which wouldnt be surprising given the way we treat our planet and each other. Rather than viewing our planet as a bountiful treasure they may view our species as a contagen which must be prevented from spreading.

[WeAreReborn]

It would be horrible if aliens made contact with humans and the first people to greet them would be the UN. They would think humans in general are the most ignorant and useless beings created.

[Bilan]

http://www.impawards.com/1996/posters/mars_attacks_ver2.jpg

[NGNM85]

I'm curious what qualifications are necessary for the position of ‘Galactic Ambassador.' (???)

[Q]

I'm curious what qualifications are necessary for the position of ‘Galactic Ambassador.' (???)

You'll need a bachelor degree at intra- and intergalactic diplomacy level 1, need to talk at least some basic Xlatl, Yoppi and Riori and some field experience in the Federation of Planets diplomacy corps would help too.

Talking of which. To quote memory alpha (http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/First_Contact) on the procedure of First Contact:


It has been stated that approaching scientists and intellectual leaders first, in private, is a preferred method of first contact, on the assumption that they would have minds open enough to easily grasp the concept of alien life. (TNG: "First Contact")

Why would aliens take notice of any "official proceedings"? Why not just contact "people with an open mind" more directly, in a covert way? This sounds like a more reasonable approach.

[Blackscare]

If this statement from Hawking is true, which it possibly isn't since this is the Daily Fail we are talking about, then it is still an utterly ridiculous statement for a well-known scientist to make.

Just what resources does Hawking think the primitive Earthlings have that a star-faring civilisation would not be able to find elsewhere or make in plentiful supply for themselves?


You could actually get the context of what he was actually saying before dismissing it outright, you know. I remember reading the source of this a few months ago and it seemed pretty sound. Then again I'm too stoned to remember his argument so make of that what you will.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

You could actually get the context of what he was actually saying before dismissing it outright, you know. I remember reading the source of this a few months ago and it seemed pretty sound. Then again I'm too stoned to remember his argument so make of that what you will.

He also says that most life will be microbial or simple animals, so the chances of an actively hostile alien civilisation existing at the same time as us, or within easy reach of us, are vanishingly small.

[Ovi]

I don't think it's inevitable; the attitude of a advanced being towards us will depend on its provenance. That's why it's important that the first Strong AI is Friendly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_artificial_intelligence), since it will have a massive headstart on any AI to follow, Friendly or otherwise.

A naturally evolved advanced being, or the Strong AI creations of aliens, will not have our comfort and safety first and foremost; although that does not necessarily mean they will seek to exterminate us.
So I'll ask the same thing you asked me


Well, ask yourself why they would give a shit. Intelligence and technological aptitude do not guarantee benevolent interest in less complex lifeforms.
Why would such an intelligent thing enslave itself to something inferior, such as human beings? What makes you think humans would be able to control something far more intelligent, regardless what we had in mind when we created them?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Why would such an intelligent thing enslave itself to something inferior, such as human beings? What makes you think humans would be able to control something far more intelligent, regardless what we had in mind when we created them?

Who says we would immediately start off with a super-intelligent AI? Far more likely we'll create sub-human intelligence first; and that means that we can upgrade the examples that conform to the conditions of Friendlyness.

Don't forget also that as the intelligence of an AI approaches that of a human or greater, the more it is appropriate to treat it as a member of society rather than a piece of property.

[chegitz guevara]

space nazis!!!!!!!!!

[chegitz guevara]

Personally, I think intelligence is likely to be vanishingly rare in the universe, given that it has only arisen once on our planet in the 4 billion years life has existed here. I think it's quite likely we are the first intelligent species in our galaxy, because any species that was sufficiently more advanced than us would already be here, and it's not believable that there would be other intelligent life out there that was at the same level as us .... unless a more advanced species already found us, and declared us off-limits, like a nature reserve.

[Tatarin]

Anyway, I think the first thing the aliens need to know is that the red star and the hammer and sickle is the symbol for peace, justice and equality not only on earth but throughout the universe.