Entire stars / planets / ecosystems / black holes
-
-
Replying to @tamzinblake @ESYudkowsky
Extracting resources from them? What is the money maker?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RandallJEllis @ESYudkowsky
Whatever you think might be worth money on Earth, all put together, as a start. Earth is an example of a planet. Other planets not having been utilized is a sign that something is up. And we know of even better uses we can put to stars rather than letting them burn away.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @tamzinblake @ESYudkowsky
I appreciate the explanation. Could you elaborate and/or give me relevant references?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @RandallJEllis @ESYudkowsky
Great filter: https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Great_Filter … fermi paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox … dyson spheres: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere …
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @tamzinblake @ESYudkowsky
Thanks, but I meant references about future space industries worth septillions of dollars
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RandallJEllis @ESYudkowsky
Space is infinite, asteroids are made of easily accessible pure minerals etc
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jacksowrd @ESYudkowsky
With how unspecific all of the answers and references I got are, I’m of the opinion that most people who read Eliezer’s material are doing it to signal and don’t really absorb it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RandallJEllis @jacksowrd
Often true, but here they're having trouble because your ontologies don't match. We're thinking that the stars contain decillions of grams of hydrogen extractible by star-lifting superintelligences, you're asking for documentation on squishy asteroid miners looking for platinum.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ESYudkowsky @jacksowrd
Sad no one else could make this understandable. So the idea is that extracting hydrogen would allow the creation of any and all other materials?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Sort of. That still doesn't quite match ontology; most of what you need to run computations is negentropy, not silicon. You're mostly converting stars to energy faster or more efficiently instead of letting the light shine wastefully out to nowhere.
-
-
Replying to @ESYudkowsky @jacksowrd
I see. So the septillions of dollars come from the value of stars as sources of energy rather than materials
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.