[extropy-chat] In the Long Run, How Much Does Intelligence Dominate Space?

Lee Corbin lcorbin at tsoft.com
Tue Jul 4 19:06:44 UTC 2006


Russell wrote

> [Eugen wrote]
> > There are successor waves trailing the pioneer wavefront.
> > Eventually, after many waves passing, you've got steady state.
> > Except, it's roiling, at a very high level of fitness. There 
> > you've got viruses, and mice, and men, and deities. Maximum
> > diversity. Not pioneers. Pioneers are specialists, and only
> > exist in wavefronts across pristine acres of congealed
> > star drek. If both such waves collide pioneers get 
> > wiped out, because their niche is gone. There's much
> > less determinism in the following waves, and the omega
> > state does not conserve the information about the origin,
> > so it's degenerate. Regardless of the point of the 
> > origin the omega state behind the trailing waves
> > looks all the same.

> Unless: ... A gram of smarts (enough for an entire upload civilization) in
> a hundred ton probe (you need the mass anyway for shielding and braking) is
> negligible baggage and more than pays for itself in ability to outthink and
> outfight a dumb probe that got there slightly before you did.

Well, *slightly* before you did---that's true. Are you saying that there
will be a continuous stream of pellets arriving? If so, I have always
though that they must colonize by persuasion (The Wind from Earth), 
because very soon the pellets that have taken over a planet have the
resources to destroy incoming pellets no matter how smart they are.

> Max feasible probe velocity is 0.2c, speed of Nicoll-Dyson laser fire 
> is c. Probes that try to colonize without permission are vapor before 
> they can finish braking. All colonization is done by negotiated
> partitioning of available space between power blocs.

Exactly!  Except that you are describing a scenario that I was explaining
a few weeks ago in person to Spike, Eliezer, and Anders (to get in a little
name-dropping, and some witnesses).  Namely, that the steady-state, when
it is reached, exhibits the above relationship between existing empires.

In particular: suppose that empire A (even if it is only a few blocks big
on Earth, though I had in mind star-cluster sized entities) got going 
according to the galactic clock a few thousand years before empire B.
Then A is larger, i.e. more extensive, than B.

But the key location is where A's boundary encounters B's. Is there 
fighting?  First, even though at the center of their empires, A is
a thousand years more advanced than B, at the boundaries their
technologies are equal. This is because of the very limited speeds
at which they spread initially. So A really has no advantage in
the frontier fighting.

But will there be war?  I don't think so because if you graph the
conflicts between France and England---just to take two examples---
you'll notice a strong secular change from 1200 (e.g. the Hundred
Years War) to 1815. In the beginning of that period they warred
almost constantly (as did practically everyone else in history).
One reason is very simple: at earlier stages of technology it is
easier to gain wealth by seizing your neighbor's than by developing
it yourself. But later, in the 18th and 19th century, war actually
impoverishes everyone. Today war between the major powers is very
unlikely because there are no winners. (Replies to just this should
go into a new thread, please.)

> Ultimate-technology warfare is scorched-earth, defender's resources
> are consumed/destroyed (returned to the interstellar medium) along
> with some of the attacker's, so evolution selects against the
> tendency to start fights and real estate once secured doesn't
> change hands.

Exactly!  I hope that everyone understood your terse statements;
though (thankfully) not as terse as Eugen's amazing pronouncements. :-)

Lee




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list