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

[Russell Wallace]

On 7/4/06, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at tsoft.com> wrote:
>
> 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.


My guess would be that a newly colonized and initially mostly empty star
system may be receptive to further immigrants, but as it fills up it will
start putting up "migrants please move on to the next empty star system"
signs. (Historical analogies would be the recolonization of Krakatoa by
plants and animals after the eruption, and European immigration to the
colonies in America and Australia - in each case as niches are filled the
barriers to further immigration become higher.)

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.


Yes, my guess is that the same will be true in a high-tech future: resources
will mostly be apportioned by negotiation rather than fighting, because war
impoverishes both sides.

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


^.^
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060704/414058e7/attachment.html>