I hardly ever see anything said about extraterrestrial dangers in the EA community. I haven’t seen Bostrom take on the subject, and in The Precipice, Ord only takes on the subject for about a page or two. I think we must shed much more light on the issue. Even Stephen Hawking has warned about the subject. If we are to do the most good and protect future generations, we must be highly cautious about advanced hostile extraterrestrial intelligent life. An advanced civilization from outer space could easily colonize our planet and enslave us as Columbus enslaved the Indigenous tribes of the Americas. It doesn’t help that we have been broadcasting to outer space since the invention of the television and perhaps even earlier. Unpopularly, I also believe it is dangerous that our civilization is visible from space at night due to light pollution. I think we ought to focus on seeing if there are alternatives to visible-from-space lighting and broadcasting via satellite. We have certainly made it known that we are ripe for the picking for any extraterrestrial civilization. I’m not sure what must be done, but I wanted to shed some light on the topic.
jessefrances
Karma: −5
jessefrances’s Quick takes
Thank you for your kind words. I agree, just because a philosopher introduced me to ideas doesn’t mean I should become one too. But I think I need more clarification about lawyers kissing a$$. Indeed, lawyers have to worry about staying afloat in their practice. Therefore, yes they must “pander” to the client. But what if said client is an entrepreneur starting a business for a good cause, perhaps a researcher starting their institute, or an animal lover forming an LLC for rescues. Then, isn’t pandering a good thing?
Why EA could do more good as a Political International rather than a Philanthropic Nonprofit
True. I do agree that those two did have a lot of help along the way.
Sometimes what is most good is unpopular