David Brin On METI
I’ve been a SETI project contributor for years now through their SETI@Home program. As a result, I found this David Brin criticism of the SETI program people and their new METI project quite interesting to read.
-
We Support
Freedomist Network
Subscribe to Dean's World by Email
6 comments
I was a vigorous participant in SETI@home for well over a year. My enthusiasm wasn’t because I wanted to be the one to find "the ETI signal," although that would have been nice, but it became almost an obsession to climb the list of active participants that started in my time frame. So much so that I had three computers (I have always had at least three computers around) working 24/7 not only when the computers were idle, but full time in the background, and given a good deal of processor priority.
One day I wanted to do something (something that I no longer remember) with my main computer that required a lot of resources, but was loath to take processor time away from SETI. Then it hit me that SETI@home had become enough of an obsession that I was close to being ashamed of myself. I no longer wanted any part of it. I closed my SETI accounts, removed all SETI@home software and never looked back or felt regret. All I have left is a framed certificate that says I completed 10,000 SETI@home units.
But those in lead SETI positions that want an "Active SETI" indeed sound like they are obsessed enough to take a reckless move. I agree with Sagan:
"…patiently learning about the universe and comparing notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand."
Active SETI (shouting into the cosmos) sounds sounds to me akin to finding a varmit hole, and poking a stick into it to see if anything friendly lives within.
METI is probably a stupid waste of time and resources, but it isn’t dangerous.
Dave Justus’s last blog post..Dr Horrible’s Sing-along Blog
Correction- probably isn’t dangerous. In fact, it almost certainly isn’t dangerous. But the potential harm is extreme enough to outweigh it’s unlikeliness. There are three outcomes-
1. Friendly Aliens
2. Hostile Aliens
3. No Aliens
(3) is by far the most likely, in which case METI is a waste.
(1) and (2) have roughly similar (and very small) probabilities, so it’s a matter of weighing the upsides and downsides of each. So it’s probable extinction vs meeting friendly aliens. In all honestly, I think the first one is more important. Friendly aliens might give us technology, but that might just as surely kill us as hostile aliens. I’d rather wait and listen until we have a decent idea of what’s going on out there.
Ryan
RyanR’s last blog post..Faces of Math
Ryan,
For it to be a danger, option 2 would have to be a bit more exact then them just being hostile. They would have to not only be hostile, but able to get here in some fashion to unleash that hostility. Secondly, for METI to be dangerous, they would have to be hostile, be able to get here, but not be able to detect without METI that they should come here to kick our ass.
Really, worry about something like that is pretty crazy. Most likely, before the METI listening evil aliens get a chance to show up and kill us all, we will already have been wiped out by an asteroid.
Dave Justus’s last blog post..Dr Horrible’s Sing-along Blog
Dave- all valid points. But the chance is still enough that I wouldn’t want to run that risk, and the upsides don’t really outweigh the downsides. Also, I agree that the asteroid is a much larger threat, and that we should be actively addressing that problem. It was also mentioned in the article that our current emissions die out to below the radio background noise in a few light years. METI would increase our visibility by several orders of magnitude.
Ryan
RyanR’s last blog post..Faces of Math
It depends on your definition of the term "hostile".
We know how to launch ships to other stars. The hard part is stopping when you get there.
On the other hand, with sufficient hostility, that really doesn’t matter. I haven’t done the calculation recently, but my recollection is that a few tons of buckshot (or less anti-buckshot) at 0.5c would probably be an effective way to say "STFU".
You must log in to post a comment.