coderage9100

Not necessarily, but that’s why I said nothing to be scared about. Just that we have done a lot of pretty cool things.  Quick AI Achievements google search should set you up good. But As soon as they are able to learn on and past our capacity and self improve it’s basically their world after that.

On 7/13/2019 at 4:05 PM, MigL said:

Intelligent machines depend on the 'bags of protoplasm' having achieved an intelligence level facilitating their construction.
As such, they would be even more scarce ( being equivalent to a subset ).

I don’t know about that. Look how close we are to creating AI. Far from anything to be scared about, but we are constantly improving it. Maybe we would succeed in creating our AI overlords before achieving any interstellar space travel.  So maybe, like Danijel Gorupec said, it’s the machines that should ask where are the other machines. 

25 minutes ago, QuantumT said:

You might find this article useful:

https://phys.org/news/2016-09-cold-black-holes.html

It basically says that the event horizon is super hot, and the inside is colder the bigger it gets.

That seems so backwards!  haha  And yeah, I was reading that article.  How do we know that it's cold?  We can't see anything one way or the other.  They don't really explain why in the few articles that I've read.

Hello!

Does it make sense for Black Holes to be the hottest things in the Universe?  Since nothing escapes it, light included, we can't actually directly observe any data.  But since energy equals heat and the incredible amount of mass and energy packed into them, wouldn't that make them the hottest things in the Universe?

And a follow up question.  IF we could see a Black Hole, what color would it be?

2 minutes ago, beecee said:

I don't find the Fermi paradox inference valid at all. Time and distance are the two great inhibitors between interstellar/galactic contact. And of course it was constructed well before any extra solar planets were ever contemplated or found. The "near infinite" size of the universe, the  "near infinite" content, the stuff of life being everywhere we look, suggests that we should not be the only planet with life in the universe.

But irrespective, the facts at this time are that we have as yet no evidence for any life off this Earth.

Right.  And even if we are the first, which seems unlikely since on multiple occasions life almost didn't happen, not the mention the age of our planet, we almost certainly aren't the only.  And while we got "lucky" things happened a few times that set us back again.  So odds are those setbacks didn't happen on other planets.  I just think distance and size of the galaxy makes it very very difficult to find signs of interplanetary/galactic societies.  Not to mention the sheer amount of resources that would take.  Makes more sense to just extend our lives and shrink the need for all those resources.  The amount of effort needed to put forth to get resources so we can build something to get resources, just doesn't seem logical compared to the alternatives.  Chances are they are out there but find better ways to deal with the resources crises.  At least in my feeble human brain that makes the most sense.

Hello!

So, I've been listening to a lot of talks about alien life and the Fermi Paradox.  It made me think; space is very very big.  Is it just possible that the size of the galaxy is so vast that we just haven't had enough time to see any intelligent life?  The galaxy is almost 53,000 light years across.  That's quite a distance.  Assuming Aplha Centauri isn't populated by space faring life, considering we see it 4 ish years in the past.

Is that a valid argument?

Thanks for your time!

EDIT:  I posted this twice by accident!  My apologies.