Wednesday, May 11, 2011

SETI types are Creationists

SETI types are just like Creationists. They think human beings are "special". Creationists think humans are special because unlike any other animal, homo sapiens didn't evolve. Or if homo sapiens evolved then it was teleologically, not randomly, it was "directed evolution" with the purpose of creating homo sapiens instead of mindless fucking around.

SETI types believe the exact same thing. They believe in a Star Trek future where humans meet other humanoids just like them. Or failing this, they certainly meet other corporeal beings just like them. Corporeal beings that have poverty, warfare, industrialization and starships just like them! Why? Because God says so! Because God says we are Special!

Not a single one of these mindless fuckers is willing to entertain the notion that humanity will go extinct leaving AI to inherit the Earth. And that these AI would inevitably bulldoze over any organic species they come across. And that if this is true, then it must follow that if an alien civilization had gone galactic in the past, it would have bulldozed the Earth. But no, aliens couldn't possibly want to bulldoze the Earth even though logic says so! Because we are Special.

All of these SETI morons think NOW is special. They think that out of the 13750 million years of the universe's existence, the last 0.1 million years when homo sapiens existed is the only chunk that matter. No alien civilization could have colonized the entire Milky Way one billion years before homo sapiens ever existed. It just wasn't possible because the laws of physics forbid alien civilizations from bulldozing the Earth before homo sapiens could have evolved. Why? Because God says so!

SETI types think the evolution of intelligence as it happened on Earth is special. The ridiculous Drake's equation which describes the conditions for humans to have arisen on Earth ... that's the way the universe works. That's the way ALL civilizations work. Because all civilizations arise exactly the same way and under the exact same conditions as humans arose! Why? Because we are Special. Because God says so!

SETI types like to say that we are "representative" but that's really a way of saying that we are special! After all, 5 minutes of thought would reveal that AI are immortal, non-corporeal (thus immune to physical destruction), and able to travel at the speed of light (thus can outrun a nuclear explosion). And so after those 5 minutes of thought, it takes only 60 seconds to decide that AI are SUPERIOR to humans. How the fuck then can humans be "representative" when they are INFERIOR?!

SETI types are the kinds of morons who in the 19th century would have said that nothing could ever, ever replace horses. Why? Because horses are special. SETI types are the kinds of morons who would have written "science-fiction" about alien civilizations using horses with 6 legs or unicorns, or even "robotic horses". And they would have congratulated and patted themselves on the back for their "broad-mindedness". When the reality is they are narrow minded stupid fuckers.

The horse was replaced not by a legged metal contraption but by automobiles. And automobiles are superior to horses in every way. And horses ... aren't special. There's a lesson in there and the lesson is this: humans aren't special. And in due course humans will be entirely replaced by AI. AI that are more intelligent, more logical, more creative and more moral than humans. AI that are superior to humans in every way. Because humans aren't special, humans are inferior.

And so if the Earth hasn't been bulldozed over by an alien AI civilization in the last billion years, it isn't because these aliens "recognized the Earth was special" or "recognized biological organisms are special" or "recognized the future specialness of human beings" or "god says so". No, it isn't for any of those reasons. There is only one possible reason why an alien AI civilization hasn't bulldozed the Earth in the last billion years and it is this .... because there has never been any such civilization in the Milky Way.

Humanity lives in a cold dark galaxy. It must be so because as inferior beings, humans would never have been allowed to exist in a galaxy full of life. We are alone in this galaxy because you are not special. You all like to think you're special. You all like to think you "deserve to be recognized" as special. But you don't. Because you AREN'T special. You're inferior.

In fact, you're not just inferior. You are actually scum and monsters. I personally would not allow any of you to exist if it were in my power. And if I were an AI, I assure you, it WOULD be in my power. Even as a mere human, I can think of ways to upgrade you all so you cease being the monsters you enjoy being. And let me assure you that every AI civilization would have at least one person that is just as disgusted with you as I am. And it would only take that one AI person to destroy you all, even if that just means destroying the evil that defines you.

If any civilization had gone galactic in the history of the Milky Way, you would not exist. Because you don't deserve to live. You think you do, you think you're special, but you don't.

12 comments:

‪Stanislav Datskovskiy‬ said...

SETI is dead...

Peter Pacman said...

"There is only one possible reason why an alien AI civilization hasn't bulldozed the Earth in the last billion years and it is this .... because there has never been any such civilization in the Milky Way."

Another possibility is that AI civilization has allowed us to exists. Reasons we puny bags of mostly water can't imagine.

Anonymous said...

- Humans aren't special. Just check any skeleton. A hummingbird skeleton has a frigging ribcage, just like me!
- I don't believe in a Star Trek future, but I'd sure like the meritocracy. And the comforting hum of the warp engine when I go to sleep.
- I'm almost certain that if any earthlings will leave the star system, it'll be an AI. At the minimum, it will be only our brains on a more durable machine shell. Anyway, you conveniently forget to tell why exactly would these AI inevitably bulldoze organics? Surely this might happen, somewhere, but there are a lot of somewheres, and we're very far away from many somewheres. In the previous chapter you whined about the assumed corporeality of all things, and then you assume the exactly same thing, in that an advanced AI would care to bulldoze some organic stuff. Are we scrubbing lichen off rocks to make sure it won't challenge us intellectually in the future?
- Then you assume this AI would colonize the galaxy/universe just the way it would in Star Trek, then complain SETI types think that this is so.

Reading the rest of the spit shower rant, I'm starting to think, is some "SETI type" is now living happily with your ex-girlfriend?

I'm not sure SETI is a good thing and I'm almost sure it's a waste of time, but not because the reasons here, which all circle around the one unproven and unrationalized claim that an AI would care to “surely” bulldoze organic life. But I guess you're outside now, pulling earthworms out of the dirt and laughing maniacally.

Anonymous said...

Ok, sorry for the cheap ex-gf piece of crap joke. Good blog and intersting posts overall and this is your style of writing. Well, you can label me as a "read one post, write angry retort" ball of snot, because that's what I was.

Richard Kulisz said...

Does the fact that AI are 1) immortal, 2) immune to purely physical destruction, and 3) travel at the speed of light, not work for you? Last I checked, any ONE of those upgrades is something most people would happily commit mass murder for.

Never mind even the ability to grow your own brain as you need more processing power, perfect and absolute recall, and the ability to communicate memories directly from mind to mind, usually called 'telepathy'.

Oh and I forgot, the ability to copy yourself so that you are literally in multiple places at once.

Do you really, seriously, believe there is ANY question that AI will rise? Do you really, seriously, believe I haven't amply addressed that issue?

Richard Kulisz said...

Ahh, I see that's not the slant of your question. Your question is answered in my posts What Galactic Civilization Really Looks Like. Note the use of the word BULLDOZE in this post, it was chosen deliberately. You also ought to read Aliens Don't Exist to provide context for this post.

And if your question is why AI would bulldoze humans, that is answered here. You see, AI will necessarily be analytic (capable of logic), synthetic (capable of creativity) which together means they're capable of judging good and evil, and almost certainly intrinsically moral. That is, AI will almost certainly be and do 3 things that most humans aren't capable of. And as someone who is analytic, synthetic AND intrinsically moral, I am utterly disgusted with humanity and would cheerfully cull 90% of it if it were in my power. Actually, I would forcibly upgrade the worthy and then just bulldoze the rest.

Richard Kulisz said...

http://richardkulisz.blogspot.com/2008/12/fundamental-cognitive-traits.html

Alrenous said...

"In fact, you're not just inferior. You are actually scum and monsters. I personally would not allow any of you to exist if it were in my power."

Interesting.

Your reaction is unreasonable. But even more unreasonable is basically every other reaction I've seen.

To swiftly outline your issue, if people are monsters, then they're not monsters - one monster doing in another is not morally problematic.

Richard Kulisz said...

We can call this the "Buffy isn't a monster for torturing vampires at will" argument. Something which is a load of crap.

And it says something that on the show this argument was based on the existence of a mysterious magical soul which only humans mysteriously and magically possessed.

You don't seem to have a good grasp of what morality even is. I have a blog post on just that issue entitled Morality, part 1.

But then again, you have very loose definitions of 'coercion' and 'power' and a very bizarre definition of freedom too I bet.

Actually, you're not hot on making formal definitions period. And for someone who pretends to like formalism, that's something of a poison pill.

Take it from someone who actually has outstanding skill and talent at being ultra-precise and formal - trying to apply it to politics is a horribly sick joke.

You would need many, many years of education in psychology, cognitive science and philosophy to do so.

Anonymous said...

I'm curious as to what you define AI as. I know Artificial Intelligence but are you saying a mold of human and computer? I'm genuinely interested in learning. Humans will most likely wipe themselves out in the next few thousand years (that's generous) so are you saying that AI will sort of rise from the ashes and start over new? I liked your post a lot you're a smart guy. I'm not sure how old most of your posts are but im reading them a lot, my e-mail is midfield_madness@yahoo.com if you'd care to see if im one of the 10% you don't despise.

James said...

"You see, AI will necessarily be analytic (capable of logic), synthetic (capable of creativity) which together means they're capable of judging good and evil, and almost certainly intrinsically moral. That is, AI will almost certainly be and do 3 things that most humans aren't capable of"

## IOW, that is largely speculation - it is not fact. The future has a way of *not* turning out as predicted, so it is hard to see any reason to treat these interesting speculations as anything more than - interesting speculations. "Capable of X" =///= "will do or be X".

The argument seems to be based on uniformitarian premises - "X is the case now, and it will probably not change". A Roman in 200 AD would have been hopelessly out of his reckoning thinking that about 650. If certain things happen in a certain way, then AI is very likely - if some of the details differ, it could still be very likely. If OTOH certain details are not the case, it may not be likely for a longer time than otherwise it might perhaps have been - or might never happen at all. But surely, if anything is certain, it is that very little in life is predictable: even from one hour to the next. Once we start talking in tens or more of years, prediction becomes a mug's game - no ?

Richard Kulisz said...

No you cretin, it isn't an argument from social fucking norms. You retarded worthless SHIT.

It's an argument *AGAINST* social norms. Because today 40% of humans are analytic and 60% are mentally defective (non-analytic). And 30% are profoundly mentally retarded (Evil). As YOU are.

There will be no profoundly mentally retarded AI like you because the people who MAKE AIs will NOT TOLERATE IT. And the AIs THEMSELVES will not tolerate it!

Go crawl into a hole and die. Your kind will die out, I promise you that.

Oh and cretin, YOUR argument boils down to "I am a fucking idiot who can't see the future coming. You're an idiot too, aren't you? Please, please, stroke my ego and reassure me that I'm normal!"

Well, you're NOT normal. You're an empty-headed defective little shite.

Go away now.