Hacker News Reader

Comment by weeksie | Hacker News Reader

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.

View on HN

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?

>as its still perfectly reasonable to expect a simulated race to have some physical presence and desire to explore the universe

Greg Egan's Diaspora is a nice sf novel exploring this theme.

Yep, last time I made a comment about Accelerando, someone also pointed me to Diaspora. I finished it about 2 weeks ago, it was mind-blowing and I could not put it down. The reason I don't mention it though, is because its easier to relate our future to Accelerando than to the pure AI's in Diaspora.

I tend to think that the simulation hypothesis put forward in Stross's "A Colder War" is a much greater likelihood. :-/

It is not reasonable at all to expect any kind of interpretable psychological pattern from an alien life form.

Oh yes, I agree, and I wasn't trying to imply that this would always be the case. I just meant that just because a civilization is simulated doesn't mean they have necessarily cut all ties with the physical universe. A civilization CAN be 100% simulated, but still be sending probes out to other stars etc.

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.

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.

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.

Someone's gonna hack it. And when they do, they've found a weapon. Then we're back to civilization's arms races and existential threats in a new theatre.

i don't think I fully understand what you're saying, could you explain it in more detail?

If there are 1000000 million advanced civs in our galaxy and 999999 of them decided not to expand, the 1 remaining will still colonize everything in a million years.

There is no reason for there to definitely be that ONE 'colonize everything' type civilization.

I would assume that it would be incredibly common for a species capable to interstellar travel to have 'cured' aging before starting to colonize the universe. There is no way we can know how a being with eternity before them thinks. Perhaps they will just do it very very slowly? Perhaps immortal civilizations have very slow population growth and decreased pressures to colonize? Perhaps there is a lot of red tape in the Interstellar Colonization Bureau to go through before you can colonize planets? Perhaps the ONE civilization decides it can only colonize barren planets, in which case they have to terraform before they can settle, slowing the process of colonization down exponentially?

I really love this topic, there is so much room for imagination.

Your assuming you can send colony probes at more than 10% of the speed of light. IMO more reasonable assumptions push colonizing the milky way out to 100+ million years.

Honestly it seems like people look at light speed the same way they look at markets and forget there are numbers below 1%. There are several ways to get a small probe up to fairly high speeds but slowing down is a lot more difficult.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com