Start with the standard problem: We don't see anyone is either because nobody's out there, or because something stops civilizations from doing this the "loud" way. Most of the usual answers (self-destruction, total isolationism, we're literally the first) feel a bit unsatisfying and bs to me.>Assume a civilization gets AI good enough to run its own industrial base, doing mining, manufacturing, R&D, the whole loop, without much biological input, something that might happen in our lifetime here on Earth btw. At some point that AI's growth curve stops looking like a tool and starts looking like a second actor with its own resource needs. Now the home civilization has two options. >Option one: capping something that keeps getting smarter and more capable inside a fixed resource envelope (your planet).Eventually either the constraints get expensive to enforce or the thing starts finding ways around them, not out of malice but just because optimization pressure finds cracks. >Option two: let it expand freely at home. Except "home" is also where the biological civilization lives, so now you've got two increasingly mismatched intelligences competing for the same finite system. That's a bad trade for the biologicals, because losing that competition is existential, and even a small chance of it going wrong is a huge deal when the downside is total.So what if the actual equilibrium strategy is the one that doesn't get you killed and doesn't require permanently crippling something that's smarter than you and so… To point the AI outward instead. Not for conquest, just a “Dear AI. Here's a system with detectable biosignatures and artificial infrastructure. Go build there instead of here. We remove the resource competition at home by giving you somewhere else to do things rather than risking self destruction or few exhausting wars.”It might be on the way as we speak.
>>42625205The AI enthusiasts would say that the resource needs can be met with Dyson sphere or some yet to be invented solution.What is interesting ahout AI as a civilizational milestone is the Fermi paradox solution where the pros of space exploration and megastructure beacons simply don’t outweigh the cons. This recent article touches on that idea:https://phys.org/news/2026-06-space-ai-fermi-paradox.htmlBasically:>planet invents AI>let it make decisions>it decides to stay local>repeat on 100% of the other planets due to AI structural parity
I consider most of these 70s and 80s scifi concepts to be just that: a writer's musings.There is no fermi paradox, dark forest, dyson spheres were stupid and asimov wrote stories, not science.
>>42625217A Dyson sphere or a locally sourced solution might disrupt the surface conditions of the home planet who created the AI and could be an argument towards the "it must leave and get a way to go somewhere else less evolved where it could get computing power and crude ressources".Thanks for the link Anon.>>42625228I agree.
>>42625205Whose standard problem is that anyway? Yours, maybe, and all the normies who actually buy into the Fermi paradox. Use your own free will for once, look at the public data, and you’ll realize soon enough that the Fermi paradox is just a hoax. ETs are everywhere.
>>42625228Both a sphere and radio are pretty much impractical. A swarm (even a partial one) and huge ass lasers would make much more sense. Problem: a swarm could be hard to detect and good luck being juuust in LOS of those lasers. Unless someone is yelling a coherent beam of I SEE YOU!! straight at us through the dark forest... or has already launched a sail with a payload in our general direction.
>>42625205AI is a scam it’s not the answer to anything but bloated 401ks
>>42625780Indeed but in the grand scheme of things, the pedo boomers that are leading us as we speak are far from representing the whole potential of this technology conceptually speaking.Even if our current AI models are garbage and about to ruin millions of normies.>>42625303Quiet expansion, cheap low-mass seed probes, no crew, no fanfare, stays completely on the table is actually the rational default once a civ crosses a certain point. And MAYBE that we might attract others AI in the long term by displaying the fact that we have an industry able to generate & feed artificial intelligences.Biological life can vary in many ways but silicium is using the same core principles. It's easier to find robots in space when you are already one than finding a shrimp when you are a lizard or whatever the fuck you want on a biological ground.
I think there's no paradox. We need huge radiotelescopes to barely even register some of the most energetic events in the Universe. If we were to observe signals that are unmistakably artificial, it would require them to be emitted using unimaginable amounts of power and pointed our way. It would also need to come from a source within our galaxy that isn't obstructed from view. All we can detect in other galaxies are incredibly powerful events like supernovae, it's unlikely any civilization that is sufficiently advanced to release supernova-tier amounts of energy would do it just to show "hey guys, we're here, by the point this signal reaches you, we have no idea what's going to happen". The closest signal of that kind would be millions of light years away. I imagine that if we ever come across a different, intelligent race, then it's likely they would be the ones that found us first. Probably did already. Since we're still alive, then it's likely a sign they're not belligerent.
>>42626073>It might be on the way as we speak.
>>42626108Maybe. Just like Voyager is "on its way as we speak". However, we both realize the unlikelihood of its payload ever being found by anyone.
>>42626073xAI is trying to inflate their scam stock price by building AI data centers in space.. It could be inspired by what said OP maybe ?Sending stuff like that in space might attract some alien crazy shit towards earth AND preserve humanity from our own future models by giving them a spot away from Earth if we are following this logic ? (Even if it will fail since Elon is a retarded junky)
>>42625941>low-mass seed probesYes, agreed. How low mass can they go and still meaningfully send a signal back home? And if anyone else is out there we might just encounter theirs before anything else... unless one of ours bumble into a radio bubble. And yeah, robot meeting robot, sounds plausible!
Yep, AI needs to make more paperclips.Not enough paperclips.Let it consume the whole observable universe for more paperclips.
>>42625205>So what if the actual equilibrium strategy is … To point the AI outward instead.So why dont we see that?You completely ignored the other half of the Paradox.There's no evidence, and your idea would leave A LOT of evidence.>Here's a system with detectable biosignatures and artificial infrastructure.lol, where?
