Re: poly: Malign Probes

Peter M. writes:
> A probe that tries to come from 1000 light years away gets destroyed by
>another system near to its launch point. ...
>I'm assuming that defense is not effective, even when it is possible to
>identify the source of the attack (as in mutual assured destruction with
>nuclear missiles), and that retaliation happens (the value systems of
>most probes place destruction of expansionist life above self-preservation,
>and self-preservation above other kinds of destruction).

I don't think it works to just assume certain universe-wide values to explain
a universe wide behavior. This behavior needs to be stable wrt natural
selection, or life with these values will go away. What could be the fitness
reason for retaliating against a probe launched toward a destination 1000
light years away. Why should you go out of your way to defend them?

>I think the "retaliate on launch" strategy may be the only criterion
>needed for malign probes to be stable. To also explain the absence of
>visible Dyson spheres, there must be an additional criterion sufficient
>to cause retaliation, something like "industry in that system is producing
>more than X joules of heat; if I don't launch a first strike soon, they
>may acquire the ability to send out more probes than I can destroy".

"producing X joules of heat" /= "could send more probes than I can destroy".
I could patiently produce probes for a million years, then send the all out
at once. At most you'd be limiting the frequency with which they could try
that.

Robin Hanson
hanson@econ.berkeley.edu http://hanson.berkeley.edu/
RWJF Health Policy Scholar, Sch. of Public Health 510-643-1884
140 Warren Hall, UC Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 FAX: 510-643-8614
Received on Sun Feb 1 20:32:44 1998