Humanity destroying a Type III civilization

[Inspector Gadget]

Well now we are getting a little ahead of ourselves here. We are not even a type 1 civilization just yet. We have yet to even land a human on another planet.

You don't need to be scared to know if you get to close you could cause a problem, I am pretty sure they are smart enough to know that. Also why wouldn't they care? Why would they want to waste their time dealing with us, when they could have simply scanned and moved on?

I though we were assuming we had developed to a type I or at least had interstellar capabilities. Of course we wouldn't be able to do anything with our current tech level. We can't even leave our solar system

Why are you assuming that the Type III ship is some recon ship? For all we know it could be a powerplant (Closer to a small generater at there level) or a refueling station. Maybe they don't use any of that but they properly have some sort of stationary structures. It could even be a dyson sphere (Or another structure of that size). Sometimes it's easier to remove the source of the problem rather then just moving away from them.

[Brabbit1987]

I though we were assuming we had developed to a type I or at least had interstellar capabilities. Of course we wouldn't be able to do anything with our current tech level. We can't even leave our solar system

Why are you assuming that the Type III ship is some recon ship? For all we know it could be a powerplant (Closer to a small generater at there level) or a refueling station. Maybe they don't use any of that but they properly have some sort of stationary structures. It could even be a dyson sphere (Or another structure of that size). Sometimes it's easier to remove the source of the problem rather then just moving away from them.

But what problem could we possibly be? Even if we where type 1, I don't see how they could even be close enough for us to do anything, or why they would need to get that close to begin with. Also if we where a type 1 we would probably not cause to many issues with them as long as they didn't cause issues with us. I highly doubt we are looking for intelligent life outside of our planet just to pick a fight.

Heck the fact we are even talking about this, shows we at least have some awareness on what not to do. XD

[Inspector Gadget]

But what problem could we possibly be? Even if we where type 1, I don't see how they could even be close enough for us to do anything, or why they would need to get that close to begin with. Also if we where a type 1 we would probably not cause to many issues with them as long as they didn't cause issues with us. I highly doubt we are looking for intelligent life outside of our planet just to pick a fight.

Heck the fact we are even talking about this, shows we at least have some awareness on what not to do. XD

Well if you think about it ants aren't really a problem. They're just very inconvenient. Also the fact that if you let them live they will infest your house and eat tear on your food and such. They can even get into pipelines and such and cause practical problems. Humans can also Infest a Type III habitat and if they grow to large they can cause problems from them as well.

Also we might not even see them as a civilization. Not at first at least. We would properly see them as some natural part of the world like a planet or old "ruins". If we recognised them and tried to communicate with them they wouldn't understand as our language would be to primitiv to understand. In the last and it would just be like some small annoyance the would either get us away or kill us. More likely the first on as there's no reason to get "bug-goo" all over the place.

If they recognised is first I already explained what i think will happen.

[Brabbit1987]

Well if you think about it ants aren't really a problem. They're just very inconvenient. Also the fact that if you let them live they will infest your house and eat tear on your food and such. They can even get into pipelines and such and cause practical problems. Humans can also Infest a Type III habitat and if they grow to large they can cause problems from them as well.

Also we might not even see them as a civilization. Not at first at least. We would properly see them as some natural part of the world like a planet or old "ruins". If we recognised them and tried to communicate with them they wouldn't understand as our language would be to primitiv to understand. In the last and it would just be like some small annoyance the would either get us away or kill us. More likely the first on as there's no reason to get "bug-goo" all over the place.

If they recognised is first I already explained what i think will happen.

No, we wouldn't act like ants >.>

I really don't get why this keeps being brought up. We are humans, not ants. We don't get into a type III food supply, we don't cause any issues for any other civilization currently. We don't even leave our own solar system.

I really wish you all would stop using such a ridiculous example -.-

[Inspector Gadget]

No, we wouldn't act like ants >.>

I really don't get why this keeps being brought up. We are humans, not ants. We don't get into a type III food supply, we don't cause any issues for any other civilization currently. We don't even leave our own solar system.

I really wish you all would stop using such a ridiculous example -.-

We don't cause any issues for any other civilization CURRENTLY. I'm going with the assumption that humans have developed interstellar flight. By that time we could cause problems.

Maybe physically and psychologically were very different from ants but our societies are very much the same. Humans have different jobs and places in society and contribute to it and we have a hierarchy. Many are at their home and help bring profit to their society and build it up and expand it. We have people how help the other people in the society (Like doctors and firefighters etc.). We have people how are out gathering ressources we can use in our society. Exactly like ants. Our societies are very similar.

[Hyomoto]

I'm only going to chime in because I cannot honestly believe this discussion has gone on for six pages, at at this point who doesn't want to get in on it? The only way, we as even a theoretical type one civilization is going to cause trouble for this theoretical type three civilization is if we actively choose to. You are correct in your initial assumption that they are more likely to be a threat to us than vice versa, and I would assume that unless specifically acted upon, we'd likely try to hide until this whole thing brushed over. Guerrilla warfare when necessary, but not by choice. We would be completely unwise to engage in any sort of conflict in which we did not have, at bare minimum, an apparent upper hand.

To play my own devil's advocate, however. Assuming that humanity had, through whatever pressure, somehow decided that it was indeed in its best interest to annoy this ship, or by our very nature had decided to try to contact it and in failing to do so somehow theorized it be better to take a chance on learning and extinction than let it pass by, then I would presume our ability to defeat them in open conflict maintains odds of exactly zero. Unless they were an entirely peaceful race with no common sense or desire to save themselves, I do not think it is reasonable we could cause enough stealth damage that we could effectively disable or destroy it. Much as you own ant analogy applies, when you have a pest problem you call an exterminator. Assuming a absolute best case scenario (rapid technological development, entirely passive race, no retaliation) then maybe we would succeed. Otherwise I think your ant analogy is better than you think, we might take down a person, but we're not going to destroy their civilization.

[Inspector Gadget]

Assumed they're aware of each other you might be correct but only if both are aware of each other. As I stated they don't even know the other species exist.

[Person012345]

No, we wouldn't act like ants >.>

I really don't get why this keeps being brought up. We are humans, not ants. We don't get into a type III food supply, we don't cause any issues for any other civilization currently. We don't even leave our own solar system.

I really wish you all would stop using such a ridiculous example -.-

It's not to say that we "act like ants" but that a type 3 would percieve us the same way we percieve ants.

[Brabbit1987]

It's not to say that we "act like ants" but that a type 3 would percieve us the same way we percieve ants.

Again, how would you know that? We may have jobs like ants, we may have a hierarchy like ants, but that is about the only similarities. Sure they are going to be smarter and more advanced, but to view another intelligent civilization as if they are ants is pretty far fetched. Again they are smarter then that.

But you know, lets just assume everything you all say does some how happen. Us killing a type III? That would be like a rabbit killing a bear. Maybe it got stuck in it's throat? XD

[Inspector Gadget]

I build it all around the idea that we could to some degree be "disease" to a type three. After watching the discussion I was convinced that we couldn't in anyway destroy a Type III but I'm stilled convinced that we could live amongst Type IIIs without detecting them and they wouldn't care about us. Like our relationship to ants or many bacteria.

But you know, lets just assume everything you all say does some how happen. Us killing a type III? That would be like a rabbit killing a bear. Maybe it got stuck in it's throat? XD

More like a rabbit killing a Type II civ.

[Hyomoto]

Unless it's a war of the worlds, signs, or independence day style defeat, I just don't think it's happening.

[KOCOUR]

I've always found that scale ridicules. Why would a type 3 civilization not recognise another intelligent species? Why might not be as intelligent as them but they must have been in our place, they probably would have high moral standards and would treat life as something delicate.

Why people allways assume, that the higher inteligence would have higher moral standarts?

[KOCOUR]

Well lets just agree to disagree... not like anyone here can be right anyway. Since you know, it's just speculation. For me, I am just trying to go by the more likely case scenario.

More of most unlikely case scenario.

[Inspector Gadget]

Unless it's a war of the worlds, signs, or independence day style defeat, I just don't think it's happening.

Those were more like Type II encounters (at least independence day. I haven't seen the others). They were leading a direct attack at us. A direct attack from a Type III would be like 30 seconds. I was building on the fact they wouldn't notice us.

[Hyomoto]

I mean more specifically that it turns out our natural environment is lethal to them, and therefore they die not technically because of us but our existence is somewhat the culprit. Or in the case of Independence Day I mean specifically that their entire race is on this ship and we blow that up.

[internetlad]

I would expect that any civilization advanced enough to be undetected thus far by us and still able to arrive at our vicinity by some means would have done the reasearch to realize that where they were going wouldn't kill them. I suppose the only caveat to this rule would be if it's a xenophobic civilization (think daleks) that simply want to kill anything that isn't them, and don't actually care about the planet they're conquering, in which case there's about 1001 ways to make Earth relatively uninabitable. Heck, Humanity as a whole is doing it right now and we're not even trying.

I suppose another possibility is that the alien civilization could destroy us without actually intending to. In the same way that it's theorized how something introduced to their ecosystem from us could work the other way around. Say they bring their pets which absorb oxygen and produce methane in massive quantities, and just so happen to reproduce rapidly in a hermaphroditic manner? one or two of those get loose and any organism that doesn't breath methane no longer lives on earth.

Going past that, thinking about where humanity was at scientifically 200 years ago which is a drop in the cosmic bucket, we may not even be able to comprehend what we are dealing with. Who's to say we wouldn't be dealing with beings made purely of something that we consider pseudo-science nowadays but is highly hazardous to life as we know it.

In either case, any civilization that would have mastered interstellar travel would most likely possess some sort of superweapon akin to what humans have in nuclear weapons. Think dark matter, black holes, the ability to manipulate gravity and plunge our planet into the sun or off into the darkest reaches of space where we are bombarded by asteroids or simply freeze to death. Everybody seems to think that if there was a war it would be fought fairly and on our terms, whereas more likely they would just fly in, bombard our major population centers with some manner of devastating superweapon from an orbit that we couldn't even touch them, and probably wouldn't even set down until the "war" was over.

EDIT: anybody who is interested in this thread should pick up the fantastic russian novella Roadside Picnic. Inspiration for the STALKER franchise and a completely bold faced look at what a real alien visit would most likely amount to.

Edited May 23, 2013 by internetlad

[Brabbit1987]

Why people allways assume, that the higher inteligence would have higher moral standarts?

You do realize the theoretical physicists who made the scale believe a type III would be unlikely to attack us. Don't quote me on this, but I am pretty sure intelligence does effect morality. The more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to have stricter and higher morals.

Now the down side to this is morals are subjective. What is good and bad to one person may not be the same to another. However, it's not very likely a type III who has lived as long as they have, would have bad moral standards, because they probably wouldn't have survived if that is the case.

More of most unlikely case scenario.

How so? Kinda hard to take your words serious with no explanation.

[Holo]

Now the down side to this is morals are subjective. What is good and bad to one person may not be the same to another. However, it's not very likely a type III who has lived as long as they have, would have bad moral standards, because they probably wouldn't have survived if that is the case.

They may be moral, but who says that their morals would affect us? I have no qualms about killing something 1000 times less intelligent than I, so why should Type 3 civilisations?

[Galacticruler]

Why people allways assume, that the higher inteligence would have higher moral standarts?

This is true:

and

agree.

EDIT:

These guys who have no faces also agree

Edited May 23, 2013 by Galacticruler

[Brabbit1987]

They may be moral, but who says that their morals would affect us? I have no qualms about killing something 1000 times less intelligent than I, so why should Type 3 civilisations?

Because a type III is smarter then you >.>, not sure how you are comparing yourself to a type III. Oh .. ya you know cause I like anime .. a type III would like anime too. That's how stupid it sounds.

I don't know why you are not grasping the concept that you have no idea what so ever what a type III would do, and according to study on intelligence, that study points to .. they are not as stupid as we are, and they certainly wouldn't kill for stupid reasons.

Again, I am not sure how you are not understanding that. The only thing this argument is doing is going in circles. I tel lyou why . .and then you as say the same darn thing with little supporting evidence besides . .it's what "you" would do, as if you are a good comparison.

It's getting really irritating trying to explain this because it sounds almost like your simply not listening or you jsut simply don't want to give up and change your views. ... If you don't understand me .. I suggest you watch some Michio Kaku videos, since he explains it much better then myself.

Edited May 23, 2013 by Brabbit1987

[Capt.Joseph Kerbertson]

To truly hack an android device, you really need access to a computer. On another note ... I have to say this article is BS.

If it is true .. they are using the word hacking wrong.

I also hate to say this .. a tablet isn't really hard to use .. even if you know nothing about it. 5 months is a long time to learn if you click this button it does this .. it's basic human understanding that you are born with. It's why you don't touch an electric fence usually more then once.

I have seen babies use a touch screen device and very young kids know how to use it fairly well. Which to me is far more impressive since they know little to nothing about the world at all.

I've had a galaxy tablet 10.1 2 since it came out... I've got no idea how to root it. I tried flashing my 360 once... once. I can and do build computers, high-spec stuff. When it comes to kernels, writing code... you might as well be speaking Sumerian.

[Brabbit1987]

I've had a galaxy tablet 10.1 2 since it came out... I've got no idea how to root it. I tried flashing my 360 once... once. I can and do build computers, high-spec stuff. When it comes to kernels, writing code... you might as well be speaking Sumerian.

I know how to root and hack just about any device. I remember my first day owning an android device I rooted it, and overclocked the processor. However, that is besides the point. In order to root a device, you need access to a computer, you need the developers device drivers which do not come with your device, and you need a net connection to get those drivers. On top of that you need to know coding to some extent if you are rooting it yourself with out the help of another persons software.

It is pretty darn obvious the article is using hacking as a very loose term here.

[KOCOUR]

Morall depends on culture, and feelings. Not inteligence. People are morale because they can feel things like sadness, pity, love, sentiment and such. Highly advanced civilisation would most probably be more pragmatic than morale. So they would probably not care about lower civilizations at all, so if they wold encounter such civilization, they would just destroy it by not noticing it, as Construction truck destroys anthill (that was mentioned in some older post in this thread).

Allso civilization as advanced as type 3 would probably so long after type 1 that would probably allready forgot that they ewer been there.

Allso i doubt that any civilisation can reach type III, because somevhere at realy advanced type II stage, they would be so advance, that they would have no motivation to evolve more. or as soon as they will technologicaly advanced to such level that non of them would have to work, they would probably start to focus mostly on entertanment. They will become lazy, and slowly degrade to immobille piles of fat, connected to some kind of virtual reality entertainment system. They would stop reproduce, and just fade away.

[Brabbit1987]

Morall depends on culture, and feelings. Not inteligence. People are morale because they can feel things like sadness, pity, love, sentiment and such. Highly advanced civilisation would most probably be more pragmatic than morale. So they would probably not care about lower civilizations at all, so if they wold encounter such civilization, they would just destroy it by not noticing it, as Construction truck destroys anthill (that was mentioned in some older post in this thread).

Allso civilization as advanced as type 3 would probably so long after type 1 that would probably allready forgot that they ewer been there.

Allso i doubt that any civilisation can reach type III, because somevhere at realy advanced type II stage, they would be so advance, that they would have no motivation to evolve more. or as soon as they will technologicaly advanced to such level that non of them would have to work, they would probably start to focus mostly on entertanment. They will become lazy, and slowly degrade to immobille piles of fat, connected to some kind of virtual reality entertainment system. They would stop reproduce, and just fade away.

Honestly, I am not sure if serious, or you don't know much about this.

First of all, intelligence does have a bit to do with morals. A person who is smarter tends to actually think about these things. But lets just say, they have no morals and they think entirely logical. That would mean it's even more unlikely they would attack us. Is it worth wasting time, resources and such to destroy this civilization? What would we gain from it? Why even bother? Logical beings would need a very good reason behind what they are doing, other wise it wouldn't be logical. Not caring about something, doesn't mean they would destroy us, it means they would leave us alone. Or are you saying they can accidentally destroy an entire planet? I then would have to say ... damn they have to be clumsy as hell.

Now being evil, their morals so messed up they would actually decide to kill us just for the hell of it. How the heck did they survive with such morals? You would think they would have destroyed themselves, due to their greed, insanity, and destruction. I just find it very unlikely a civilization would even make it past type I with morals like that.

Now about laziness? I don't think any civilization would just stop at type II. If they made it to type II you have to imagine they are looking to continue to improve. If they where going to lose the will to continue, it would have happened back at type I. How do you suppose anyone would get fat when .. .that simply doesn't happen ?? By the time you are type II, your medical tech is so advanced .. you are very unlikely to even worry about death, let alone being physically fit.

[KOCOUR]

Oh yes. Iam mechnical engineer, i understand machines, not people. so it is entirely possible that i dont know much about this. If you are psychologist or sociologist than its certain, that you know far more about this than me.

Everithing i present here is just theory. And i presenting it for only two reasons:

1. i enjoy such discussions

2. i Strongly dissagree with this wydely acceptet idea, that more inteligent/advanced automaticaly means more moral. Because my experience with people, says otherwise.