[ExI] Feasibility of solid Dyson Sphere WAS mbrains again: request
eugen at leitl.org
Fri Sep 30 11:02:00 UTC 2011
On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 06:34:51PM -0700, Dennis May wrote:
> I understand the attraction of central planning
> and vast civilization constructs. I'm just not
The Earth ecosystem has no central planning.
It's pretty large, though.
Postbiology is about extending the ecosystem
beyond planetary surfaces and beyond a narrow
substrate range. It's emergence is engineered,
but not its existance much beyond the diversity
> sure Mbrains are the way to use resources
> effectively or wisely. As the value of the
The Sun dumping 4 MT/s flux into the cosmic
microwave background heat sink without further
sense and purpose is not particularly effective
> Mbrain rises so does the cost of insuring its
> safety - eating more and more resources
Stuff and nonsense. Of course more postbiomass
means more potential diversity, which means more
stability. But nobody is planning for it.
> protecting it from threats without or within.
How do you protect your brain from the Cult of Scientology?
Just because the infrastructure is not exploitable,
it doesn't mean the higher-order processes aren't.
> The cost of protecting it will be high because
> the investment is concentrated. I do not believe
What is the investment in a square mile of
Amazonas rainforest? Where is it concentrated?
Who is attacking it?
> it can be hidden [stealth] or move about
You cannot hide absence of VIS stars very well.
> [nomadic] so it must exist in fortress mode.
Where are the walls in a square mile of Amazonas
rainforest? I don't mean it's safe. It isn't.
But it has no fortresses.
> Fortresses can be stable for long periods of
> time - until technology renders them
> vulnerable. It would seem a future driven view
The law of the universe define the optimal
physics of computation. Everything else is
> would anticipate that technology will move
> faster and faster rendering a large fortress
> vulnerable before it can even be constructed.
There's obviously a provably optimal computational
substrate, and it's not far away in design space
once you have machine-phase nanotechnology.
> That is part of why I took the Superstealth SND
You can't hide unless you're not there.
> approach instead many years ago. Stealth,
> Nomadic, Dispersed. Our present means
> of industrialization depends largely upon
> processes that are centralized in a manner
> vulnerable to any number of problems. Long
The ecosystem isn't centralized.
> term survival "big-picture questions for human
> civilization" should look at long term stability
> as a primary criteria. I believe the Superstealth
> SND approach is fundamental to the
> survival of any technological civilization.
I believe that superstealth and advanced cultures
are mutually exclusive. You can't hide your metabolism.
Unless you're not there.
> It encompasses survival techniques learned
> in nature and in modern military technology.
I think you will find a square mile of Amazon
rainforest eminently observable, especially
considered the control group.
> I am not interested in trashing the mbrain
> concept - I'm sure many interesting ideas
> have come out of it. I have been interested
> in the alternative Superstealth SND approach
> for a very long time and am more interested
> in talking about what it has to offer.
> I had not heard of the institute you work for
> until now - interesting. It reminds me of the
> Perimeter Institute in some ways. I am glad
> you are willing to talk in a forum like this.
> Many in academia are not so willing.
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
More information about the extropy-chat