Author Topic: Space dogs  (Read 2479 times)

Vanadium Gryllz

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 4450
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #15 on: November 26, 2016, 08:22:59 am »
When the choice is suffocate in our own shit on this planet or get the hell offworld to colonize others how many people will be considering the ethics of the latter?

It would seem the most ethical to only target completely barren planets for colonisation. Any form of life, whether it meets the requirements to be called sentient/intelligent or otherwise could have all kinds of unforseen interactions with the humans of the future.

Do we even steer clear of entire solar systems if we detect life there? Probably.

I'm with TWJ on this one though - I've never really had to consider the ethics of stuff before and I feel ill equipped to be doing it with regards to space travel.
"I was fine until my skin came off.  I'm never going to South Attelboro again."

Pergamos

  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 15995
  • Did it for the cookies.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #16 on: November 26, 2016, 11:16:17 am »
I think colonization of our system is distinctly possible.  I feel like ethically it is not as questionable as colonization of the Americas was because there is no sign of life.  If we were able to travel at interstellar distances I think that assessing a new system for danger would generally establish if there was life or not.  Anything that can breathe the same air as us seems similar enough that infection might be a danger, in one direction or the other.  We might not be able to detect alien pathogens so self interest alone seems like it would make colonization of living planets less likely. 

I suspect that ethical concerns would not be something that would strongly motivate financiers or engineers of space colonization, in treatment of colonists maybe, but most likely not in treatment of native ecosystems.  That means that for those who it would be a serious ethical concern for the question becomes not whether to do it or not, but how to stop people from doing it.

Pope Pelvis Flirtini

  • Outlandish
  • ***
  • Posts: 6336
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #17 on: November 26, 2016, 11:43:53 am »
"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #18 on: November 26, 2016, 04:58:23 pm »
There are extensive ethical analyses done before any type of space exploration or any other science is actually conducted. This isn't *solely* hypothetical, although at this point interstellar travel is a hypothetical. Without immediately assuming a dystopian future in which we have taken our own planet past recovery, which is a scenario that assumes that we are too irresponsible to even consider space colonization, if we do reach a point where it is technologically possible to send colony ships to other planets, the conversation about ethics will be had, by necessity. If there is not enough of an intellectual and academic scaffolding for the conversation to take place, it will be because there is no space agency left, and therefore no space colonization, in which case it will be moot.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3698687/
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #19 on: November 26, 2016, 05:15:44 pm »
I just ran across this article, and the author does a pretty good job of identifying some of the most basic fundamentals of the ethical scaffolding, IMO.

https://www.wired.com/2014/11/future-of-space-exploration/

Quote
...the lesson of Zheng He remains: Exploration of distant lands will be a short-lived venture unless it yields something really, really valuable.

If future space voyagers decided to exploit a barren, lifeless planet, few would be upset. But such an endeavor is unlikely. As far as we know, a world without life would be a world without oxygen, a stable climate, or the possibility of growing food. Barring the discovery of some immensely valuable substance that doesn’t exist on Earth, there would be no reason to set up shop there, let alone despoil it. A world with functioning ecosystems would be more attractive.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2016, 05:18:19 pm by Mesozoic Mister Nigel »
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Junkenstein

  • Technically-Oriented & Horribly Mobile Crecy of Crab Lice.
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 114864
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #20 on: November 26, 2016, 07:53:05 pm »
One problem I'm not that worried about is barren/inhospitable places being picked on. It's reasonable to assume that science and tech along the lines of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_fertilization will get more interest and variations could theoretically be used on such planets. Places we look at as totally nonviable now may not be so in 2-300 years.

I'm not sure the logic of the article above fully takes into account ego. Being involved in this kind of exploration, particularly early on when the threshold for a huge discovery is much closer puts you into the history books in a big way. With more billionaires every year, the ones who are going to make the news when they die are the ones actively trying to change the world in a particular way. Musk and Thiel for example will both be big news, but the tone will be very different for each.

This Zheng He chap sounds interesting too. Will be looking more at him.
Nine naked Men just walking down the road will cause a heap of trouble for all concerned.

Q. G. Pennyworth

  • Slimy Thing Who
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 82702
  • QUEEN BITCH OF FLYERS
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #21 on: November 26, 2016, 09:00:54 pm »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.
Overheating Pheremone Pustule of Last Saturday's Jiggle Fun| _xgeWireToEvent: Unknown extension 131, this should never happen.

Don't fucking judge me, I've got tentacles for a face.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2016, 11:28:17 pm »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


The Wizard Joseph

  • Tryna transcend duality or whatever
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 47213
  • Product of Wisconsin
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2016, 11:30:39 pm »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

If nothing else render them into chemical fertilizer and feed the crops.
You can't get out backward.  You have to go forward to go back.. better press on! - Willie Wonka, PBUH

Life can be seen as a game with no reset button, no extra lives, and if the power goes out there is no restarting.  If that's all you see life as you are not long for this world, and never will get it.

"Ayn Rand never swung a hammer in her life and had serious dominance issues" - The Fountainhead

"World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimisation."
 - Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality :lulz:

Q. G. Pennyworth

  • Slimy Thing Who
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 82702
  • QUEEN BITCH OF FLYERS
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #24 on: November 26, 2016, 11:54:40 pm »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

Assuming their sugars and proteins have the right chirality. And they aren't made of arsenic or some shit. There's plenty that grows on earth we can't eat and for reasons other than "it's poisonous on purpose."
Overheating Pheremone Pustule of Last Saturday's Jiggle Fun| _xgeWireToEvent: Unknown extension 131, this should never happen.

Don't fucking judge me, I've got tentacles for a face.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2016, 12:01:37 am »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

If nothing else render them into chemical fertilizer and feed the crops.

I can think of very few scenarios in which that would be at all an ethical decision.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2016, 12:15:11 am »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

Assuming their sugars and proteins have the right chirality. And they aren't made of arsenic or some shit. There's plenty that grows on earth we can't eat and for reasons other than "it's poisonous on purpose."

The same basic rules of physics and chemistry apply everywhere in the universe. While it's possible that life on another planet could be based on D aminos, they would still break down to component parts with the right processing.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

  • v=1/3πr2h
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 687093
  • The sky tastes like red exuberance.
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2016, 12:16:17 am »
Not that any of that is particularly related to the ethics of interstellar colonizaton.
“I’m guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk,” Charles Wick said. “It was very complicated.”


The Wizard Joseph

  • Tryna transcend duality or whatever
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 47213
  • Product of Wisconsin
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2016, 01:39:28 am »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

If nothing else render them into chemical fertilizer and feed the crops.

I can think of very few scenarios in which that would be at all an ethical decision.

I was thinking along the lines of "Hey this (whatever) we found is entirely inedible because it naturally accumulates heavy metals in a novel fashion (or something).

But watch me just harvest the chemicals we need through chemistry to feed our kelp farm."

What scenarios were you thinking?  :?
You can't get out backward.  You have to go forward to go back.. better press on! - Willie Wonka, PBUH

Life can be seen as a game with no reset button, no extra lives, and if the power goes out there is no restarting.  If that's all you see life as you are not long for this world, and never will get it.

"Ayn Rand never swung a hammer in her life and had serious dominance issues" - The Fountainhead

"World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimisation."
 - Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality :lulz:

Q. G. Pennyworth

  • Slimy Thing Who
  • Deserved It
  • ****
  • Posts: 82702
  • QUEEN BITCH OF FLYERS
    • View Profile
Re: Space dogs
« Reply #29 on: November 27, 2016, 03:21:26 am »
One thing interstellar colonization has going for it over planetary scale is that the plausible returns from an interaction with an alien civilization are by necessity not the same kind of resource grabbing nonsense we saw on earth. It is wildly idiotic to waste so much time, energy, and money stealing raw resources out from under the little green men, as opposed to mining in our own system in an inhospitable environment. it's also laughably unlikely that we will be able to infect one another with anything, or even use each other as food. If life on earth was partially or wholly seeded from outside sources, it becomes more plausible that we could be a little bit like whatever we meet out there, at least on the molecular level, but even then it's rare enough for a disease to jump between two different mammals, the differences between planets would be enormous.

Personally, I do think that dropping bacteria bombs on planets with small scale existing ecosystems would be a catastrophe. I think that interacting with intelligent life, should we ever be lucky enough to stumble upon it, is completely inevitable and as such it's more important to focus on getting that interaction right than deciding whether or not we should. It only takes one person to open their mouth, after all, and an entire planet to keep quiet.

One thing that not a lot of people realize is that carbon is very likely the only molecule that can serve as a basis for life, because of its unique bond number. So, if we encounter other life forms, it is very likely that they will also be carbon-based. A lot of what forms "life" is simply reliant on universal properties of atoms.

In short, we will probably be able to eat them, and vise versa.

If nothing else render them into chemical fertilizer and feed the crops.

I can think of very few scenarios in which that would be at all an ethical decision.

I was thinking along the lines of "Hey this (whatever) we found is entirely inedible because it naturally accumulates heavy metals in a novel fashion (or something).

But watch me just harvest the chemicals we need through chemistry to feed our kelp farm."

What scenarios were you thinking?  :?

The part where you're damaging an alien ecosystem for your own benefit.
Overheating Pheremone Pustule of Last Saturday's Jiggle Fun| _xgeWireToEvent: Unknown extension 131, this should never happen.

Don't fucking judge me, I've got tentacles for a face.