Slashdot Mirror


Television For an Audience 45 Light Years Away

beebopdebop writes, "The Irish Times notes that Europe goes intergalactic tonight with the broadcast of a program conceived for aliens and broadcast towards a point 45 light years away in the direction of the Big Dipper. The two naked hosts will present their own unclothed bodies as examples of our physical embodiments, and will tell about daily human existence. Music, art, and our own personal messages will be transmitted as well as discussions from sociologists, scientists, and space experts. This project is the brainchild of the French-based Centre National D'etudes Spatiales and is rooted in seriousness as a natural extension of the gold-plated ambassador disks of Pioneer 10. Those of us wishing to be included can still post messages to be sent into space via a CNES antenna. We will have to wait 90 years to learn whether or not some lifeform was listening."

324 comments

  1. The reply: by Legion303 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Put some clothes on, you flabby bastards."

    1. Re:The reply: by Kidbro · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Put some clothes on, you flabby bastards."

      This is a European initiative, not an American one ;)

    2. Re:The reply: by ral8158 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Because American people are always obese, and European people are always thin and fit?

      Painting with a wide brush only makes you look stupid.

    3. Re:The reply: by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Look, I'm American, but a) Americans are too fat on average and b) his joke was funny. Even funnier is that someone managed to use the opening to make fun of Bush.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:The reply: by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      The reply will probably more along the lines of "Hello, beings from Earth, we thank you for the delicious-appearing pictures of your food animals, and welcome you to the Interstellar Federation of Meat-Eating Worlds. A trade mission is already on its way to your planet via hyperdrive: we look forward to a mutually-beneficial exchange of meats."

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    5. Re:The reply: by pedantic+bore · · Score: 2, Funny
      More likely, it will be something to the effect of:



      This is an automated message.

      The message you sent (attached below) requires confirmation
      before it can be delivered. To confirm that you sent the
      message below, just hit the "R"eply button and send this
      message back (you don't need to edit anything). Once this is
      done, no more confirmations will be necessary.


      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    6. Re:The reply: by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      "Always"? No. "Often enough to notice and for the joke to be funny"? You bet.

      I say this as a flabby American that's been to Europe recently.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    7. Re:The reply: by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      In that case, we can truly blame the French for this culinary disaster.

    8. Re:The reply: by An+ominous+Cow+art · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot. How is it possible that nobody has posted a link to this?!

    9. Re:The reply: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is this wize?Tell to some one or thing light years away that we are here especting some
      kind of contact?
      Well...human race evolved "this way"...how do the others evolved?

    10. Re:The reply: by pilgrim23 · · Score: 1

      45 light years and there STILL is nothing on to watch!

      --
      - Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
    11. Re:The reply: by ral8158 · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying that people in the US aren't fat/obese. I'm just saying that painting with a wide brush is always foolish and stupid, for the same reason that saying "Black people are always gangbangers" is stupid.

      (No, I'm not trying to make the statement US:Fat::Black:Gangbanger. I'm just saying that painting with a wide brush is always foolish and stupid.)

    12. Re:The reply: by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      The fattest person I've ever seen in my life was an Italian woman in Rome.
      Extreme example I realize, but I would never be able to support the claim that
      there aren't just as many obese Europeans as there are Americans.

      And as for the social tolerance for nudity, I'd have to agree that certain parts of Europe are more
      relaxed, meaning that in general public nudity might only get you arrested, but not end up forcing you
      to register as a "sex offender" for it and be ordered to go door to door explaining to your neighbors that
      are a "sex offender."

      There are far more beaches in Europe where nudity is forbidden, than where it is allowed.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    13. Re:The reply: by Kidbro · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was a joke, dammit.

      Anyhoo, since people started complaining so much about it, I had to dig this up (30kg/m^2+ is apparently the definition of "obese"). The European countries are chosen "randomly" (in other words, I scrolled up and down that list, and picked the ones I noticed, until I had a total of ten).

    14. Re:The reply: by noigmn · · Score: 1

      Damn, America is so far infront the others will never catch them. You've even beaten the Hungarians...

      --
      Slashdot is powered by your submission.
    15. Re:The reply: by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      >Damn, America is so far infront the others will never catch them. You've even beaten the Hungarians...

      I would prefer to see "America" broken down reasonable into regions, if not states, and then compared to roughly equivalent regions.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    16. Re:The reply: by Pathwalker · · Score: 2, Informative

      The CDC has maps breaking down obesity by state.

      The 2005 data is here.

    17. Re:The reply: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So since they are European the alien response should be, "Take a shower with soap, shave your arm pits, and go see a dentists"?

      Stereotyping is fun, isn't it?

    18. Re:The reply: by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      And as for the social tolerance for nudity, I'd have to agree that certain parts of Europe are more relaxed, meaning that in general public nudity might only get you arrested, but not end up forcing you to register as a "sex offender" for it and be ordered to go door to door explaining to your neighbors that are a "sex offender."
      Excuse me? I'm in Central Europe and public nudity doesn't usually get you anything except strange looks. In fact there have been numerous promotions in recent years where appearing naked gets you free clothes at a clothes store or free entry to a museum for a day. And the best part is, our TV stations can show it without people freaking out. Now, that doesn't happen every day, but it's not particularly shocking for anyone.

      What exactly should naked people be arrested for?
    19. Re:The reply: by fishbowl · · Score: 1


      >What exactly should naked people be arrested for?

      Try it in a medium or small town in Italy, or anywhere in Greece that isn't "designated" clothing-optional.
      People have been arrested in the UK very recently for "indecent exposure", when they were doing nothing more than hiking naked.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    20. Re:The reply: by pafrusurewa · · Score: 1
      Try it in a medium or small town in Italy, or anywhere in Greece that isn't "designated" clothing-optional.
      Good, those are rather conservative (religious) areas by most standards. You said that the best case in "relaxed" regions is that you might only get arrested, now you're choosing rather "un-relaxed" examples yourself.
      People have been arrested in the UK very recently for "indecent exposure", when they were doing nothing more than hiking naked.
      I would be very careful when it comes to comparing anything in the UK with the rest of Europe.
  2. Europe goes intergalactic tonight by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the target is only 45 light years away surely that should be intragalactic.

    1. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by beh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd be curious to know how they want to prepare any potential "viewers" for what's in the stream coming to them...

      Even if they get a broadcast at a certain frequency - how intuitive will it be for an alien listener, that this broadcast will be audio/video in PAL, SECAM or NTSC coding?

      Sounds pretty useless to me - about the same chance, as if they send a windows version of the Encyclopedia Britannica out for aliens to browse through...

      In comparison, the gold plate on voyager is something more readily accessible - as an effort was made to keep the message simple.

    2. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I remember reading about a conference on communication with ET's where one person prepared a message, not encrypted, but just expressed in a strange way; which is what would would expect from ET's. The message was circulated to all attendees and none of them could extract the meaning, though there was a lot of slapping of foreheads, etc, when the answer was revealed.

      So yes, even for people who know they will have to decode an unknown message, it can be hard to meaning with no starting point.

    3. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Lord+Crc · · Score: 3, Informative

      I remember reading about a conference on communication with ET's where one person prepared a message, not encrypted, but just expressed in a strange way

      Yeah I saw something similar. The guy had made a file containing the binary data and handed to fellow ET researchers, asking if they could decode it. Nobody was able to do it. The trick was that if you printed out the 1's and 0's using a certain column width, it drew a picture.

      There's a LOT of ways to encode data, which might seem intuative to some but will baffle others. I don't think you'll have to go further than the various file formats we got to see that ;)

    4. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by name*censored* · · Score: 1
      Wow that was the first thing i thought when i read this...

      Maybe if we send them a TV with a nuclear UPS, a big pushbutton for switching it on, and a really good satellite reciever? Sure the radio waves for the tv show will have long come and gone, but at least they got a TV out of it... :\
      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    5. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Kjella · · Score: 1

      While also true, I think the word they were looking for is interstellar. Intragalactic sounds like "as opposed to all the intergalactic broadcasts", e.g. intranet and internet. While we do use words like international and interregional, we don't use intranational and intraregional, it's simply national and regional. Following that pattern, we'd probably simply say galactic. It would be somewhat misleading though, as it sounds like the whole galaxy could tune in. Since it's a point-to-point broadcast, interstellar is the most accurate word. </dictionary nazi>

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    6. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by aplusjimages · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. If you send a signal out there that no one has a receiver for, then how are they supposed to pick it up. What if we sent out an xm radio signal and all they use is FM and AM still? Maybe a better project would be to just hurl some garbage into space. Something they can actually look at and touch, then they could try to piece together what it all means.

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    7. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      How about even more simple than that? What about something akin to a portable-DVD player with the video already in the drive. Just have the "big push button", and there you go.

    8. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by flosofl · · Score: 1
      How about even more simple than that? What about something akin to a portable-DVD player with the video already in the drive. Just have the "big push button", and there you go.
      But then you're making the assumption that the ETs can even see in the same spectrum.
      --
      "This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
    9. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      how intuitive will it be for an alien listener, that this broadcast will be audio/video in PAL, SECAM or NTSC coding?

      Actually if they can't figure out that whole PAL, SECAM or NTSC thing, they'll still get the image in black and white. The black and white part of analog video is built in a pretty obvious manner actually. Anyways I think the most important is that they get a signal from us, so they know that we're here, then it doesn't really matter whether they see us naked or not.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    10. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      Even if they get a broadcast at a certain frequency - how intuitive will it be for an alien listener, that this broadcast will be audio/video in PAL, SECAM or NTSC coding?

      It's not that crazy to expect them to figure it out.

      Remember the scene in "The Hunt for Red October" where he plays back the tape at 10X speed and says it has to be man-made?

      That's what would happen here.
      A video signal has obvious cues that tell the receiver to go to a new line or go back to the top. Given two such cues in the signal, it's not a crazy leap to guess that the signal might be a two dimensional representation of something.

      If they actually find the signal, they should be able to work out the encoding.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    11. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by icepick72 · · Score: 1

      You might be adjusting your spectrum for a long time if the aliens don't hear or see. There are probably many other non-human ways to perceive things.

    12. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by beh · · Score: 1

      Well, yes and no...

      In Hunt For The Red October, it was, at least, clear that they were looking at sounds. Also, looking at the issue there is that the people involved with the system should know whether they are even close to an area that could produce a volcano (volcanos basically only occur near fault-lines -- hearing volcano noises anywhere else will be sufficient in itself).

      In Contact, the signal was preceeded / accompanied by a *very* simple and *very* strong signal - something designed to be picked up; and the signal went on for days.

      If you look at the Seti project, there are some characteristics, which *we* think will be dead giveaways - but who tells you that this is the kind of signal, aliens might indeed by generating - we just assume an alien signal might have to look roughly like 'xyz', simply because that's the way ours look.

      A TV signal is something very complex in nature - but if you look at the recurrent features of those signals (end of line / end of screen sync breaks), these could be all kinds of things. Parts of text - parts of sound, parts of concepts we don't consider right now.

      In comparison, the gold plate on Voyager is relatively straightforward - no changes in colours, the same material all over, very regular, the only irregularity being the message imprinted in it. But - yes - obviously, the big difference between the signals is that voyager would take *very* long indeed to get to a place significantly far enough away from us - and it will only be at one place at a time, it's not like a broadcast going in all directions.

    13. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by guywcole · · Score: 1

      Actually, a copy of Encyclopedia Britannica in any one language would be somewhat useful. The beauty of the encyclopedia is that it provides relationships of ideas and would likely contain comprehendable images.

      Soon the complex relationships of words of images becomes an understanding of our world, at some level.

      My point is that it wouldn't be easy but it would be doable for an alien race to understand the ideas of our communication, assuming they have the biological mechanisms to comprehend our messages (in this case, eyes that perceive in our visible range and interpretive logic neuron structures).

      True, a television program is more difficult to use. It requires complex technology and understanding of EM radiation. But EM radiation flies a lot faster than a book and we'd rather have an answer in the next 100 years than the next few million years.

      A few thoughts on making a book more usable, though:
      1. Use a medium/ink combination so that the ink's EM absorbancy is higher at any point across the spectrum. This should increase the chance that any EM-sensing organism could perceive the contrast between ink and medium and increase
      2. Use multiple ways of describing each item. Words, images, sounds, shapes. The more levels of association, the more complex the relationship expression can be.
      3. One collumn output, at most. One idea per page or other "natural" division is best. Especially if they can be separated and physically rearranged by the reader. Also, therefore, all relationships should be expressed in on the page, not by the page itself.

    14. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      I agree that a TV signal will take more time to figure out than a phonorecord, but I believe it is a problem within the grasp of a reasonably-advanced alien civilization.

      Although our societies might be radically different, the physics on both worlds will be the same. IMO, this means they will develop many of the same designs we have, oscillators, filters, etc.

      It could very well take them years to figure it out (just look how long it took us to "decrypt" hieroglyphics) but I believe it is a tractable problem. I can't help but think how much fun it would be to work on too.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    15. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Hangin10 · · Score: 1

      What's XM? eXtraterrestrial Modulation? Nah, in all seriousness though, even if it's in some digital format, it's still going to use FM or AM (or PM, but I can't claim to know anything about that). The simplest radio message AFAIK, is to blast some meaningless but obviously-not-natural AM pattern across the spectrum (and the galaxy) with massive amounts of power.

    16. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Slashdiddly · · Score: 1

      Which is why the encoded disc sent with the Voyager contains a calibration frame - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record

    17. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      but how long will it take to get there? the best bleeding-edge engines conceived would not be able to get to c/20. that is 900 years one way. and the mass won't spread out reducing the probability of it getting picked up. and even if by sheer luck it hits a planet, it will burn up before anyone has a change to study it. electromagnetic transmission is the way to go until we figure out details of time-travel and/or wormholes. extended periods of non-natural transmissions like triangle or sawtooth wave, abs(sin(t)), semicircular waveform, repeating sq pulses with widths following Fib sequence, etc. would make a good signature of intelligent life.

      another interesting method that i read a while ago was to transmit high/low signals totaling product of two prime numbers. intelligent life would recognize this as such and create arrange the signals in rectangular pattern to reveal a 2D picture.

    18. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that intergalactic is correct terminology, since you could represent our solar system as a intragalactic. Our sun is the server and the planets are the desktops. Our SUN server is networked with other SUNs using p2p gravity. Every once in a while we might send a packet of information aka satellites.

    19. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      Yes, I was assuming that. I would've made that distiction, but I thought it was a given.

    20. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by asjk · · Score: 1
      I'd be curious to know how they want to prepare any potential "viewers" for what's in the stream coming to them...

      Not to mention the question about how we know whether or not they have "eyes" to detect this part of our visible electomagnatic spectrum.

    21. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by couchslug · · Score: 1

      All the recipients need to "get" from the message is "food that advertises, nice atmosphere, come and git it!"

      What underlies the (IMO incredibly arrogant) assumption that if we contact sufficiently superior beings they will regard us as anything but a useful resource?

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    22. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      > Nobody was able to do it. The trick was that if you printed out the 1's and 0's using a certain column width, it drew a picture

      Then they aren't the brightest bulbs are they? I am not an expert of any kind but my first thought would be to view it in rows and columns. My first guess for the dimensions would be to check if the number of bits is a prime number. If so, there would only be ONE choice for the width and height. I'll bet anyone smart enough to send a message to the stars would think of that and encode it that way...

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    23. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by Kiriwas · · Score: 1

      Actually you wouldn't want it to be a prime would you? You'd want the length to be the product of two primes, or the product of three primes it was to be a movie. If the length was a prime, you'd have no idea how to break it up, except to keep it as a 1D vector.

    24. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      Oops, my bad. Right, I meant the product of two primes.

      Now watch hundreds of vengeful slashdotters descend on my parent post with the fury of a thousand grammar mistakes!

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    25. Re:Europe goes intergalactic tonight by dk-software-engineer · · Score: 1

      I remember reading about a conference on communication with ET's
      If we actually did get a signal from outer space, I'm sure we would spend more than a conference trying to decode it. :)

  3. The two naked hosts by Xemu · · Score: 3, Funny

    "The two naked hosts will present their own unclothed bodies as examples of our physical embodiments, and will tell about daily human existence."

    Let's hope they picked Ingrid Swede and Scarlet Johansson. It would be interesting to hear them speak about their daily life.

    --
    Tell your friends about xenu.net
    1. Re:The two naked hosts by hey! · · Score: 1

      Let's hope they picked Ingrid Swede and Scarlet Johansson. It would be interesting to hear them speak about their daily life.

      What? And make them think we reproduce like parthenogenesis?

      Of course if Scarlett Johansson was a typical human female, we probably would, ceteris paribus.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:The two naked hosts by tehSpork · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, the real question is: Will these episodes be aired on our planet? :)

    3. Re:The two naked hosts by NekoXP · · Score: 1

      As long as it's not Keith Chegwin, we'll all be fine.

      Naked Jungle was just toooo much.

    4. Re:The two naked hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You read that weird Joystiq article about the Wii didn't you?

    5. Re:The two naked hosts by aplusjimages · · Score: 1

      Let's hope they picked Ingrid Swede and Scarlet Johansson.

      You didn't hear that it was Dustin Diamond and Paris Hilton representing the physical emobdiments.

      Also why are the people on the Pioneer Plaque white?

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    6. Re:The two naked hosts by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Funny
      Also why are the people on the Pioneer Plaque white?

      Don't worry, to the aliens, we all look the same... :)

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    7. Re:The two naked hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Decorating a space probe with a gold plaque isn't bling-bling???

    8. Re:The two naked hosts by Fred_A · · Score: 2, Informative

      They used animated versions of the two "sample humans" that were engraved on the pioneer probes.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    9. Re:The two naked hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "We were the only ones smart enough to actually build something to get out of the Solar System..."

      You were the only ones stupid enough to care.

    10. Re:The two naked hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    11. Re:The two naked hosts by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      That's a lovely mindset. Rather than lambaste you for being a racist, I will simply ask that you please read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond. It describes in thoroughly referenced detail how a combination of geography, flora and fauna, disease, and natural resources have led to European dominance. In short, white people got lucky. It's a long book, but I'm sure that your superior white brain can handle it. "The Third Chimpanzee" and "Collapse" are also very good reads, with the former being shorter and more entertaining.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    12. Re:The two naked hosts by snilloc · · Score: 1

      ... taste the same...

    13. Re:The two naked hosts by aplusjimages · · Score: 1

      Hey next time give a heads up. I was eating when I clicked on the link. I do not enjoy eating puke.

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    14. Re:The two naked hosts by cylcyl · · Score: 1

      yes, but in Japan there will be pixelated mosaic around the genital region.

    15. Re:The two naked hosts by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      It describes in thoroughly referenced detail how a combination of geography, flora and fauna, disease, and natural resources have led to European dominance. In short, white people got lucky.
      Or possibly white people were smart enough to choose Europe as their base?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    16. Re:The two naked hosts by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      You mean when they were trying to decide where to crash-land their UFO?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  4. hm, by joe+155 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet? If anything aliens would be getting pissed off with being inundated with out crap 24/7... and it doesn't help that they'd be getting about 3000 channels all the time so would find it really hard to tell the difference between them.

    On a slightly less serious note, is it really a good idea to teach potentially hostile aliens about how we work (and by extension how to kill us)? Not to mention we know that the only people who are really going to watch are 1000 light-years away waiting for single female lawyer

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    1. Re:hm, by brown-eyed+slug · · Score: 1

      As you flag your second comment 'slightly less serious' I will treat it with a modicum of seriousness. Do you honestly believe that an alien intelligence with the knowledge and power to travel 45 light years across space will have any trouble at all finding a way to kill us? Don't forget they've probably seen most of the CSI series too...

    2. Re:hm, by speckledpig · · Score: 0

      I hope that we're smart like in the movie and built TWO giant alien machines in case one breaks down.

    3. Re:hm, by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      Yes, but now we can include our own messages. I've sent: "To whoever finds this note, I have been imprisoned by my father, who wishes me to marry against my will. Please, please, please come and rescue me. I am in the tall tower of Swamp Castle."

      That should make it an interesting day when their invasion army warps into orbit.

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    4. Re:hm, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet?

      Probably that's why they still don't want to contact us.

    5. Re:hm, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Upon which one of the aliens will say "At last! A call! A cry of distress! This could be the sign that leads us to the Holy Grail! Brave, brave Concorde, you shall not have died in vain!"

    6. Re:hm, by fuzzybunny · · Score: 1

      Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet?

      Yeah, but considering what percentage of that is FOX news, daytime soap operas, infomercials and Jerry Springer, maybe they'd be happy to see some hot naked French chicks without having to invade North Dakota with pod ships just so they can get all the good porn on cable.

      --
      Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
    7. Re:hm, by Mikey-San · · Score: 1

      On a slightly less serious note, is it really a good idea to teach potentially hostile aliens about how we work (and by extension how to kill us)?

      Don't you know that security through obscurity always fails?

      --
      Mikey-San
      Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
    8. Re:hm, by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      Look, does anyone really think that hostile aliens would actually invade our planet? It would be a waste of resources.

      If an alien species capable of interstellar flight really wanted to take over our planet, it would be far more effective to just lug an asteroid into a collision course with earth. No muss, no fuss.

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    9. Re:hm, by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1
      is it really a good idea to teach potentially hostile aliens about how we work
      Yeah, but these aliens are going to be deceived into thinking we go around naked. I can't wait to see the surprise on their faces when they turn up with skin-crisping UV energy weapons only to discover we almost always wear protective clothing.
      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    10. Re:hm, by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      If anything aliens would be getting pissed off with being inundated with out crap 24/7...

      Why do some people have such a though time putting themselves in the place of the hypothetical aliens. Even among the scientists, some think that the aliens know about us but find us not evolved enough to be interesting to meet. Come on, if we received a broadcast from aliens, even if the broadcasted us their equivalent of Inspector Derrick, we'd be happy as fuck, just to find out that there's some other sort of life out there. But go figure why, to alot of people the hypothetical aliens would be smarter than us, much more advanced technologically than us, they would know about other aliens, they would even know about us and they would snob us and even wanna destroy us just so they can have our planet.

      Between gods and superior aliens, it seems that we humans can hardly even consider the idea that we may be the most "sophisticated" (for a lack of a more accurate term) type of beings out there.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    11. Re:hm, by stunt_penguin · · Score: 1

      Don't forget they've probably seen most of the CSI series too...

      So....... they'll get away with it too??

      Alien scum!

      --
      When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
    12. Re:hm, by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      It worked pretty well for the Aztecs, American Indians, Amazonian tribes, etc.

      The security through obscurity analogy fails completely if the people that discover you are only interested in robbery, enslavement or genocide.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    13. Re:hm, by Crunchie+Frog · · Score: 1

      Uh, I'm-- I'm not quite dead, sir

      --
      --- Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
    14. Re:hm, by dk.r*nger · · Score: 1
      If anything aliens would be getting pissed off with being inundated with out crap 24/7

      Yeah, it's really annoying. They are constantly debating this issue, and all this noise is routinely considered to be the end of radioborne television. Many are arguing that a replacement of the Simple Radio Transfer Protocol will solve the problem, while others say that would not be so simple.
  5. 90 years is optimistic by the+grace+of+R'hllor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, we'd have to wait a few years longer. Before 'they' figure out that it was a transmission, before they've decoded it correctly (do you think they use PAL or NTSC? Decisions!) and can begin to interpret it (who says they have eyes or ears?), manage to figure out what we are and what we're actually saying, and managed to construct a reply in a format that we're likely to be able to decode, you're probably looking at quite a few years.

    Given that we've only just managed to decipher what our own first man on moon actually said after a few decades, I think you're looking at decades of work.

    And all that's before they even manage to create and send a reply, which will take 45 years to get here.

    1. Re:90 years is optimistic by Steve+Cox · · Score: 4, Funny

      Knowing the French, it's likely to be transmitted in SECAM-L rather than PAL/NTSC so no one will be able to decode it :)

      Steve.

    2. Re:90 years is optimistic by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Well, actually, it can be a lot less than 90 years. For all we know, there is a spacecraft just outside the solar system that is receiving the data and can send a response. All life may not be biological and work on our timeframes.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    3. Re:90 years is optimistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Given that we've only just managed to decipher what our own first man on moon actually said after a few decades, I think you're looking at decades of work.
      They could echo back the transmission. Kind of an ACK.
    4. Re:90 years is optimistic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No, we'd have to wait a few years longer. Before 'they' figure out that it was a transmission, before they've decoded it correctly (do you think they use PAL or NTSC? Decisions!) and can begin to interpret it (who says they have eyes or ears?), manage to figure out what we are and what we're actually saying, and managed to construct a reply in a format that we're likely to be able to decode, you're probably looking at quite a few years."

      If they are smart, they will start responding in whatever code they think should be breakable by any intelligence. Whenever they manage to break a part of our code, they can modify their response to make it easier to grasp for us.

      If they do that, the first response (which basically says 'you are not alone') will arrive closely after 90 years. Getting a conversation going will take longer.

    5. Re:90 years is optimistic by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1
      Before 'they' figure out that it was a transmission, before they've decoded it correctly (do you think they use PAL or NTSC? Decisions!) and can begin to interpret it (who says they have eyes or ears?), manage to figure out what we are and what we're actually saying, and managed to construct a reply in a format that we're likely to be able to decode, you're probably looking at quite a few years.


      Yeah, and they'd also have to make sure that nobody uses the tape to record the latest episode of "Survivor".

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  6. Naked Presenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this any different from any other european news broadcast??

    1. Re:Naked Presenters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this any different from any other european news broadcast??

      European news broadcasts aren't relevant to daily human existence.

  7. Hope they have Tivo over there by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Funny

    It would be a shame to send it once and have them miss it.

    This is the problem I have with specific EM signals.
    Once they are gone, thats it.

    I still think the only real way to communicate with outlying civilisations properly will be with supernovas.
    Though, only one message could be send - "Help our sun is blowing u^&"%£%^&!*(())[NO CARRIER]

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
    1. Re:Hope they have Tivo over there by davidc · · Score: 1

      It would be a shame to send it once and have them miss it.

      Don't worry. If they wait, they'll be able to catch in on the re-run.

    2. Re:Hope they have Tivo over there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's hope it wasn't marked with the Broadcast Flag, else they could get in trouble recording it.

    3. Re:Hope they have Tivo over there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Help our sun is blowing u^&"%£%^&!*(())[NO CARRIER]
      Terrestrial dial-up is unreliable like that.
  8. SFL by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd think they would much prefer the latest episode of Single Female Lawyer.

    --
    Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
    1. Re:SFL by FusionDragon2099 · · Score: 1

      Single Female Lawyer! Fighting for her client Wearing sexy miniskirts And being self-reliant!

    2. Re:SFL by ejp1082 · · Score: 1

      Yes! Now if you'll excuse me, I have to return home to catch the end of a thousand year old Leno monologue.

  9. I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by wisebabo · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've gotta be the first to say this: So with the two naked presenters (presumably male and female adults, I haven't seen the show), exactly how are they going to show human reproduction?

    1. Re:I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can print them out and make cutouts, and much like a kid with a puzzle, try to put them together...Though that might lead to the conclusion of skull fucking...

    2. Re:I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by he-sk · · Score: 3, Informative

      The "hosts" were animated drawings, which looked surprisingly like the man and woman drawn on the disk that is aboard Pioneer.

      Incidentelly, I was watching TV with a friend yesterday as I don't own one, and while we flipped through the channels we stumbled upon that program. In the 10 minutes or so we watched, they showed an interview with Orson Welles, telling that he was shocked to learn that so many people took his radio play of War of the Worlds for real and then a guy who on 9/11 first thought that he, too, was in some kind of fake television play. Then they showed a report about early alien/monster movies and how they spoke of the desire and fear we have of the unknown.

      Inbetween segments they had a split screen with one panel showing a guy laying on the grass talking about something or other and in the other panels they showed beautiful nature photography.

      Quite entertaining, I must say.

      --
      Free Manning, jail Obama.
    3. Re:I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by Monsieur_F · · Score: 4, Informative
      The "hosts" were animated drawings


      Actually they are real human beings, look here

      Anyway the program is mainly an artform to me, and the "send it to aliens" is just there as a cover.
      The idea is funny, but that's it...

      The best part was the letters to aliens from some average people, some were quite funny.
      --
      McCartney fans pay bus tickets. [...] Lennon fans too, with discretion.
    4. Re:I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by thc69 · · Score: 2, Funny
      I was watching TV with a friend yesterday as I don't own one
      You'd have more friends if you understood that you're not supposed to own them...
      --
      Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
    5. Re:I'm going to get my Karma wiped out but... by LouisZepher · · Score: 1

      I'm still on my first cup here, so it took me three reads to understand that you meant owning the actual friend, and not that one would have more time to make friends if one didn't own a television...

  10. Program title by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The two naked hosts will present their own unclothed bodies as examples of our physical embodiments.


    Debbie Does the Big Dipper.

  11. Ak ak aaak ak aak! by nephridium · · Score: 1

    What if the Martians are all like "Nice planet. We'll take it!" after receiving our transmission? Has anyone thought that through? - In any case just keep in mind: if a Martian draws a big circle into the air, it's not the international sign of the doughnut!

    --


    And when you gaze long enough into the code, the code will also gaze into you.
  12. Naivete.... by VendettaMF · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why do people continue to delude themselves that an alien intelligence will be able to comprehend communication as we consider it? And if they can that they'll be foolish enough to waste time on decoding, renderring and interpreting an unreachably distant point of light? And if they go that far, why the heck does anyone expect a usefull response?

    At best there'll be no response, but should they then pick up on our everyday TV the likely response is surely some form of uncrewed planet buster. I know I'd prefer not to leave a hornets nest like humanity brewing in any corner of my galaxy. No intelligence with a self-preservation process would.

    We are a crippled duck, currently hidden in a vast swamp. Our only security being through obscurity. Why the hell do people insist on flailing around screaming for the hunters? Actually, that doesn't quite work. We are a crippled unknown creature, that appears to have the mindset of a ravaging beast, but lacking the ability. Which lives longer? The rabid dog spazzing out in broad daylight in th emiddle of the street or the rabid cat stalking the shadows?

    --
    kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    1. Re:Naivete.... by BlueLightning · · Score: 1

      Well, turn it around then: if we received a signal from a distant alien race, don't you think we'd put our very best people onto decoding it the very same day it was received? You bet we would.

      Your point about our safety is well made. However, what if early explorers decided it was too dangerous to go out? "Nah, there might be monsters in those hills, I think i'll stay home by the fire". Safe, but pretty dull when there might be interesting things to discover.

    2. Re:Naivete.... by Canordis · · Score: 1

      Why do people continue to delude themselves that an alien intelligence will be able to comprehend communication as we consider it? And if they can that they'll be foolish enough to waste time on decoding, renderring and interpreting an unreachably distant point of light? And if they go that far, why the heck does anyone expect a usefull response? Because that's what we would do in their place.

      --
      I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.
    3. Re:Naivete.... by VendettaMF · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Assuming we recognised it as a coherent signal at any rate.

      Previously explorers have gone out and been eaten. They haven't sent out messages saying "I'm here. Come and do what you will to me".

      Previous explorers risked themselves, not their entire civilisations.
      I'm not saying don't look. I'm just saying look cautiously, with a recognition that any intellignet life whose development we can comprehend will have evolved with (psychological) self-preservation and combat capabilities.

      Previous explorers also tended to have defense capabilities equivalent to the task. Most civilisations capable of plucking a TV signal from the ether and decoding it completely (from scratch) will be so far beyond us that should they decide we're a danger (or even decide we're too noisy and likely to draw negative attention to this corner of the spiral) we'll never even know about it.

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    4. Re:Naivete.... by noamsml · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your immediate assumption might be that alien intelligence must be superior, but why would you assume that?

    5. Re:Naivete.... by VendettaMF · · Score: 1

      The "Apes or Angels" concept.

      Humanity in a form capable of doing anything useful with electromagnetic signals has existed for less than 50 years. We will (probably) exist in a vastly more powerfull state for a long time. (Sizable second and third possibilities of completely eradicating our species ourselves and resetting our society back to waiting for lightning to start a fire for us acknowledged).

      Best guess : Whoever receives and decodes a TV signal like that won't have just started shoving EM-radiation around a mere 50 years ago. (Unless they see in the 54-72 MHz range and think in SECAM (which I reckon is just as likely as their existing in the 45 LY range).

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    6. Re:Naivete.... by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      Probably because EM is a good medium, the signal they receive (we don't care about pre-electrical civilizations) would be distinct from the background noise, there is a pattern to the signal, etc.

      Curiosity (we don't care about non-curious civs -- actually, an oxymoron) will ensure they want to figure out what this strange, point emanation is.

      You presume unreachability.

      We (the current generation) don't expect, nor care about a response.

    7. Re:Naivete.... by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      Why the hell do people insist on flailing around screaming for the hunters?

      I believe it is because we are so desparate to find that we are not totally alone in the universe that we are willing to run the risk of our own destruction.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    8. Re:Naivete.... by DamnStupidElf · · Score: 1

      At best there'll be no response, but should they then pick up on our everyday TV the likely response is surely some form of uncrewed planet buster. I know I'd prefer not to leave a hornets nest like humanity brewing in any corner of my galaxy. No intelligence with a self-preservation process would.

      If our planet is any indication, there is a very brief period where relatively simple intelligence exists with the ability to communicate across great distances and before superintelligence arises. Even if the singularity doesn't hit for 100 or 200 more years, that's still just 200 or 300 years that civilizations would be anywhere near equal in intelligence and capabilities. For two civilizations light years apart to synchronize their progress is highly unlikely. Either we're broadcasting at fish and plants, or the superintelligence that receives our messages either already knows about us or doesn't care.

    9. Re:Naivete.... by N-S+Equations · · Score: 1

      They don't have to understand the signal to take notice.

      If they are sufficiently intelligent, they will notice a constant signal at a certain frequency, coming from the direction of earth. Which will hopefully lead to them to think that there is intelligent life out there, and try to decode the signal. I think for this purpose, it might be better to just send easy to understand pulses instead of TV signal, like the in movie "Contact".

      Of course, this is assuming that they want to contact us and be friends. Maybe they'll just show up one thursday to build a hyperspace bypass.

      --
      The universe is simple, it's the explanation that is complicated.
    10. Re:Naivete.... by JChung2006 · · Score: 1

      We aren't that significant or threatening to any alien society sophisticated and advanced enough to decipher our signal. Why fear a planet whose lifeforms haven't even traveled farther than their own moon?

    11. Re:Naivete.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If our planet is any indication, there is a very brief period where relatively simple intelligence exists with the ability to communicate across great distances and before superintelligence arises.
      If our planet is any indication, what's far more likely is that simple intelligence exists with the ability to communicate across great distances only for a short time before the simple intelligence completely and utterly destroys itself and probably much of the other life on the planet, too.
    12. Re:Naivete.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Because we've only figured out the technology to receive the signal we're sending within the last 50 years or so. If the aliens were not more intelligent than us, it would involve hitting that 50-year window (give or take differing developmental rates) -- an extraordinarily unlikely thing to happen -- because otherwise they wouldn't receive it at all.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    13. Re:Naivete.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      New Sig. Now all you plonkers responding to the sig instead of the content are going to look _so_ dumb....

      Except for the ones that quoted it in their reply, that is! : P

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    14. Re:Naivete.... by VendettaMF · · Score: 1

      Heh, a good point. Mind you the allegedly "new" sig has been there so long I'd forgotten it existed.

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
  13. Your planet has been blacklisted for pr0n-spamming by D4C5CE · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sincerely, The alien operators of FireWall@Dipper.Big

  14. This is pointless by Timesprout · · Score: 2, Funny

    They will already have seen episodes of Knight Rider and they will know that the Hoff rules the universe. Why would they bother with this crap?

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
    1. Re:This is pointless by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Funny

      They then saw Baywatch and after analysing the bouncing boobies for a while decided Hoff wasn't the ruler.
      It was a silicone intelligence.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
  15. Futurama? by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah, great idea! Let's beam out the first season of Lost and wait for the aliens to invade us because the finale gave them no answers and they got fed up with waiting for us to beam out the second season...

    1. Re:Futurama? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If J. J. Abrams pitched that show to ABC, they'd buy it.

    2. Re:Futurama? by freeweed · · Score: 1

      The second season didn't give any answers, either.

      We ever start beaming out Lost, and the Earth is truly fucked. That show will be cancelled long before they actually reveal anything :)

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
  16. Naked News by Tx · · Score: 1

    The two naked hosts will present their own unclothed bodies as examples of our physical embodiments, and will tell about daily human existence.

    Naked News has naked presenters telling about daily human existence, so this is old ;). If they just broadcast NN instead, I bet that'll get ET over here in a hurry though.

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
    1. Re:Naked News by Tx · · Score: 1

      Oops, missed a , sorry. Was meant to be be like

      Naked News has naked presenters telling about daily human existence, so this is old ;). If they just broadcast NN instead, I bet that'll get ET over here in a hurry though.

      --
      Oh no... it's the future.
    2. Re:Naked News by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      I don't think that that would get ET here any more quickly.

      Assuming that ET has an entirely different physiology, the would be aliens would have to be into humans through an extension of zoophilia or perhaps develop a form of xenophilia. (Is this the correct prefix when talking about ETs?)

  17. Probability??? by mahesh_gharat · · Score: 1

    What are the chances that those aliens will be listening on those frequencies, if they are listening at all? What are the chances that we will be still using Television after 90 Years. Have they made proper provisions to schedule the listening activity after 90 years?

    1. Re:Probability??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Presumably they will have a project like SETI to look for these signals.

  18. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 4, Funny
    Great, now we're doing intergalactic pornography. What's next?

    Inter-dimensional porn?

    As a second thought; how could we ever make pornography that turns aliens on? Just imagine a dog or a lizard trying to get you turned on? (or a fat chick)>
    What if the mechanisms of reproduction are very different as ours? Maybe they would think of us as ugly stupid mamals, mainly driven by mating instincts and obsessively seek out into the universe for mating-partners. They OR would avoid earth, or send out more probing UFO's. Eitherway, not the desired result.

    --
    I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
  19. proprietary junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, looking at a random sampling of the uploaded messages, those aliens had better be running all the latest proprietary junk from microsoft. Either that, or be really good in reverse engineering. (And let's hope the DMCA does not reach all the way to Errai!)

  20. 90 years by Xemu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We will have to wait 90 years to learn whether or not some lifeform was listening.

    But then the MPAA can still sue them for DCMA and copyright violations if they decoded the movie without a license and used parts of our broadcast in their reply!

    --
    Tell your friends about xenu.net
  21. Andromeda Strain by Vexler · · Score: 1

    In the book "Andromeda Strain", Michael Crichton discussed the various methods that an alien civilization might choose to contact us. Various manifestations of electromagnetic transmission, such as radio or television, are deemed to have too high a distance-to-expense ratio since signals fade in inverse square of the distance: Too little bang for too much buck.

    An interesting solution was proposed whereby you would use biological organisms to spread the news of your existence. By spreading vast amounts of cheap, space-hardened spores that contain all the necessary ingredients to regenerate into a complete alien organism, you gain two advantages over EM transmissions: The "signal", in this case the regenerated organism, does not fade, and you can mass-produce these spores very cheaply. These organisms can then help whoever the recipient is to contact the home planet of the alien species.

    I think it's safe to say that, barring a significant leap in our understanding of biology and biophysics, we are unfortunately still stuck at an intergalactic stone age when it comes to long-distance communication technologies.

    1. Re:Andromeda Strain by FhnuZoag · · Score: 1

      Well, once again, Crichton is full of shit.

      Life, as we know, mutates, and any signal you try to send with it quickly runs out. And mass producing such organisms and sending them out into space is *not* cheap, especially not relative to the alternative of sending out EM signals. (How are you going to get the momentum changes to send these things certain places?) The real killer is that it's ridiculously slow.

      And such spores will also fade in the inverse square ratio - in general, anything that sprays out in an arc around an object must do so. The only way to get out of the inverse square law is either to use coherent sources like lasers, which of course only works if you know what you are shooting at, or to use some sort of self-replicating robotic message. Biology, being based on messy chemistry, just isn't good enough.

    2. Re:Andromeda Strain by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but imagine the sheer number of geeks that would line up to have their semen shot into space! Erm, wait, on second thought, maybe that isn't such a pleasant scenario.....

    3. Re:Andromeda Strain by fritsd · · Score: 1

      If the organisms are like the Descolada virus in Orson Scott Card's books, what message are we trying to send?

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    4. Re:Andromeda Strain by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      Yeah, but imagine the sheer number of geeks that would line up to have their semen shot into space!

      Ah here it is.

    5. Re:Andromeda Strain by egomaniac · · Score: 1

      The only way to get out of the inverse square law is either to use coherent sources like lasers...

      That is incorrect -- lasers follow the normal inverse-square law, just as all other EMF emissions do. To avoid this, you would have to have a laser beam which doesn't spread out, and of course such a thing is impossible under the laws of physics. All laser beams spread out over distance.

      The reason we sometimes say that laser beams don't follow the inverse square law is a bit of handwaving with respect to human vision. Suppose you have a tiny pinpoint beam of light entering your pupil. 100% of the beam's energy enters your eye. Suppose you now stand farther away that the beam is twice as wide upon entering your eye. The beam is now twice as wide, but it's still much smaller than your pupil, so 100% of the beam's energy is still entering your eye. The inverse-square law is fully in effect, but it (in a sense) doesn't matter because, due to your comparatively huge pupils, it isn't helping to reduce the amount of energy entering your eye. At a significant distance, where the beam is large relative to your pupil, the inverse-square law is much more apparent with respect to laser beams.

      --
      ZFS: because love is never having to say fsck
    6. Re:Andromeda Strain by Oligonicella · · Score: 1

      When the ignorant fanatics fight the ignorant fanatics everybody loses.

      Nope. The nonigorant get a neat show.

    7. Re:Andromeda Strain by oohshiny · · Score: 1

      The only way to get out of the inverse square law is either to use coherent sources like lasers,

      Lasers also follow the inverse square law, they just have better constants. Furthermore, coherence is incidental to their directional properties.

    8. Re:Andromeda Strain by Jeremi · · Score: 1
      The only way to get out of the inverse square law is [...] or to use some sort of self-replicating robotic message. Biology, being based on messy chemistry, just isn't good enough.


      What do you think robots are made out of? Pixie dust? Guess what -- they are also based on chemistry. Most likely any robots capable of doing this job would be difficult to distinguish from "life".

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    9. Re:Andromeda Strain by jiawen · · Score: 1

      More broadly, there's the idea of von Neumann probes: self-replicating machines designed to cross the vacuum from system to system. But there are reasons why such probes probably aren't used.

  22. Television For an ADULT Audience 45 Light-ys Away by D4C5CE · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ...would probably be the more appropriate title.

    We may be sending out the wrong signals though by telling them this world is not just pre-Warp, but even pre-Wardrobe. ;-)

    Anyway, there's reason to be afraid someone may also have seriously misunderstood mankind's actual role in reproduction for Aliens...

  23. Re:Your planet has been blacklisted for pr0n-spamm by mikek3332002 · · Score: 1

    That's exactly what I was thinking. Your comment should be one of the 5+ funnies.

  24. Uh, too late. by Guillaume+Castel · · Score: 1, Insightful

    That's just great. Yet another announcement for a past event. Thank you /.

  25. Historical Documents by agw · · Score: 1

    Don't we already send out enough signals into space, many of which deal with the subject of life on our planet?

    Oh, yeah. They already got our "historical documents" and shaped their entire society accordingly.

  26. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

  27. Great.. Tell them by Ricken · · Score: 1

    Tell them we want Elvis back.

  28. LRRR by thhamm · · Score: 1

    those aliens will be pissed we replaced their favorite show "single female lawyer" with two silly naked people.

    we want McNeal!!!

  29. DRM by arthurpaliden · · Score: 2, Funny

    Too bad they will not be able to read the message when it gets there since they will not have the correct regional coding on their TV sets.

    1. Re:DRM by coke_scp · · Score: 1

      They're lucky in that case, as in 90 years, the copyright on the film will have been bought by some media company, and they'll be liable for 45 years of licensing fees, with interest.

  30. Their response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Earthlings,
    We received your last transmission, but being it DRMed we werent' able to make a recording to study it. Could you please send it again in unrestricted format? We will wait for the 90 years delay. Thanks.

  31. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Denial93 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    >You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

    And to those sorry people who have girlfriends with the last names of GIF and JPG. With the population of American geeks here, it surprises me that noone has yet wondered why we don't do it properly and send those aliens goatse.cx.

  32. Why do the aliens need... by infolib · · Score: 1

    ..my full name, address and phone number? They don't even know what PLANET I'm on for Zarquons sake!

    Not to mention the piss-poor interstellar data protection laws.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced libertarian utopia is indistinguishable from government.
  33. Couple things by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1) Just because we blast out signals all the time doesn't mean they are perceptible from any distance. None of our normal transmission systems are designed for anything but terrestrial operation. A large number face the Earth, many are low power and omnidirectional, and so on. Not the kind of thing really designed to be noticeable at interstellar distances. The SNR is likely to be too low. So something specifically designed and focused for it has a much better chance.

    2) I don't think it's a worry if they are hostile because it wouldn't really matter. Supposing they are a hostile race, and thus devote a good deal of research and effort to weapons development as we do, and supposing their technology is far enough ahead of ours that they could send an invasion fleet (something we are at least hundreds of years away form, maybe more) I think its' safe to assume that we would get rolled regardless of the information we provided. I mean think of it like this: Would it really matter if a society like 18th century Europe gave any info to a foe as advanced as the current US military? The technology difference is so massive that there's no hope. A single armour division would probably be sufficient to crush whole armies.

    Now please don't let this give the impression that I don't think this is a massive waste of time and money, it is, but not because of the reasons you listed (it's a waste because in all likelihood there's nothing there).

    1. Re:Couple things by VendettaMF · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why would they bother with an invasion fleet? Surely a one time momentum investment in applying a giant chunk of iron based meteoric junk to the "Terran Problem" is a much more likely scenario?

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    2. Re:Couple things by c_forq · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's why we have to be careful what we send! We can't let them know we have Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck!

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    3. Re:Couple things by Liam+Slider · · Score: 1

      Yes, they might come to take them back home!

    4. Re:Couple things by snarkh · · Score: 1

      I mean think of it like this: Would it really matter if a society like 18th century Europe gave any info to a foe as advanced as the current US military?

      This is understating the issue greatly. Really, it would be more similar to a tribe of cavemen doing battle with a modern army.
      Any civilization capable of mounting an invasion over interstellar distances would likely be many thousand years more advanced in technology.

    5. Re:Couple things by Nfnitloop · · Score: 1

      I don't even think we need to tip our hand to show drilling-rig ripened actors since everyone knows we know see any first contact until we begin to discover the fundamental principles of warp drive!

    6. Re:Couple things by ejp1082 · · Score: 1

      I'm reminded of many a game of Civilization that turned out that way (with the help of cheat codes, anyway).

    7. Re:Couple things by ejp1082 · · Score: 1

      Please. We all know that we'd only have to send Jeff Goldblum and Will Smith after them armed with a Macintosh computer. My only worry would be if the aliens have upgraded to the Intel Macs yet, thus ensuring that the virus would be compatible.

    8. Re:Couple things by NormalVisual · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, don't be silly - any civilization advanced enough to perfect interstellar travel would obviously have Rosetta on their systems!

      Sheesh, some people...

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    9. Re:Couple things by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      You have a point, but somehow I cannot shake of the following quote/scene when reading your story:

      "Guinan tells Captain Picard, "Now that they [the Borg] know of your existence ..." and Picard realized that they would never stop until they found Earth." [ST:TNG - Q Who?]

      (Yes, yes.. it had to be a ST quote.. this is /. remember? ;))

      The Galaxy is a pretty big place and it takes a long, long time for a signal at lightspeed to cross it. Some race on the other side might be extremely advanced, but can simply not have yet picked up our non-subspace signal. ;)

    10. Re:Couple things by raduf · · Score: 1

      Now please don't let this give the impression that I don't think this is a massive waste of time and money, it is, but not because of the reasons you listed (it's a waste because in all likelihood there's nothing there).

      So it's either entertaintment or sortof educational - gets children into sciences. No necessarily a waste.

      But for the sake of argument I'll pretent to take it seriously :)

      Thinking about hostility is _not_ absurd. Evolution, as most people seem to forget, is based on death. It's the weak that die, not the strong that survive. No matter how little we may have in common, things like life and death are likely among them.

      Also there the technology necessary to kill a civilisation is much lower then one needed for first contact. Astronomy is a pretty precise science, and either an energy weapon or a slow moving (ion drive) warhead are things we can actually build now.
      Yes, _we_ could destroy a civilisation light years away.

      So it's not so absurd to want to be quiet.

    11. Re:Couple things by TheUser0x58 · · Score: 1

      Would it really matter if a society like 18th century Europe gave any info to a foe as advanced as the current US military? The technology difference is so massive that there's no hope. A single armour division would probably be sufficient to crush whole armies.

      Of course, this completely ignores the possibility that alien cultures might have a completely different notion of war technology. For example, aliens on a planet with lighter gravity may also have weaker constitutions, so their weapons would be better tailored for those conditions. Whereas against us their weapons might feel like geting hit with a ping pong ball. And besides, look at War of the Worlds--the aliens in that film were susceptible to common bacterial illnesses.

      Your example compares basically the same technology in a different stage of evolution; obviously the more evolved form would destroy the less evolved form. However, comparing alien warfare to that of ours is comparing two lines of technology that have evolved in complete isolation from each other, so there is little grounds for such a comparison.

      --
      -- listen to interesting music, support independent radio... WPRB
    12. Re:Couple things by smoker2 · · Score: 1
      Matt

      Damon
    13. Re:Couple things by rapidweather · · Score: 1
      We will have to wait 90 years to learn whether or not some lifeform was listening

      I would think it would be a lot longer than that. If they were listening, perhaps they would not reply. Also, have we not broadcast into space a lot more than this item? Since we have not been indundated with replies, especially resulting from the charming "Star Trek" series of TV shows, I for one am not going to be holding my breath in 90 years. Assuredly, I doubt I will have a breath to hold then.

    14. Re:Couple things by PhiRatE · · Score: 1

      Given enough ammunition and fuel, it's likely that a single helicopter gunship would be sufficient to crush whole armies :) short of getting a lucky shot in with a cannon, there's just not a lot of hope. The technology difference would likely be equivalent, at best we'd have to get a lucky shot in with a nuke.

      But more importantly, despite what the rest of the nutters around here are saying about how we should keep our heads down, the simple fact is that nobody is likely to bother coming to visit us because intellectual curiosity aside, it's a long way to go for absolutely no benefit.

      There is nothing Earth or humanity has to offer which can't be found easier closer to 'home'. There's no point trying to wipe us out, or enslave us etc. Not on a civilisation scale anyway.

      Thus far, we have come up with 4 possible scenarios for the attack of the earth:

      1. Bizarre alien sex fetishes
      2. The destruction of humanity due to its insistence in polluting the EM spectrum with talkshows.
      3. Plausibly, we could end up falling victim to the equivalent of a pirate attack, a bunch of freebooters with a couple of interstellar ships who feel like setting up their own little feifdom where interstellar "law".
      4. Religion. Of course.

      Quite frankly, it's all incredibly far fetched. Personally, I don't think they're ever going to come all the way out here, it's a lot of effort for no real gain.

      --
      You can't win a fight.
    15. Re:Couple things by Raenex · · Score: 1

      The obvious reason that they'd want to destroy us is to kill a potential enemy in the crib. Really, first contact is a big unknown -- both how we would react, and how they would react. Broadcasting beacons when we're really weak is dangerous.

    16. Re:Couple things by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      Any civilization capable of mounting an invasion over interstellar distances would likely be many thousand years more advanced in technology.
      They could be good at technology in general but bad at weaponry specifically. Or they might be very small or weak, or have poor immune systems, or become easily addicted to ginger...
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    17. Re:Couple things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But 'weak' is a relative term. We may well be the most advanced civilization in the galaxy and our beacons might be bombarding a planet with nothing more than microbes around. Say 500 years from now we actually have the capacity for manned travel to distant solar systems, whose to say there isn't a civilization that is capable of intergalatic travel that could still wipe us out with a single ship?

      Yes, first contact is a big unknown, but I really think it would be sad if we chose to cower in fear of the unknown. The chances that first contact might be a wonderous thing are just as good (IMO, likely much greater) than the encounter leading to some sort of invasion.

  34. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    uh, how old is the lizard, and what is it wearing? Do you have some pics?

  35. Oh no! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they broadcasted naked, the aliens will find out about the lower human horn!!

  36. I suggest.. by rkaa · · Score: 1

    ..we transmit looping reruns of Soilent Green :)

  37. Won't somebody Think of the Children? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How dare we broadcast this during early alien prime time?

    All those alien children will still be up watching TV.

    What if they tune in and see our [gasp!] nekked bodies?

    Oh won't somebody Think Of The Alien Children?

  38. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really? so it's 100% ok for women to go naken or barely clothed in muslim countries?

    wow! we are told over here that muslim women most be completely covered at all times or face death.

  39. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 1
    That is why I said virtually, instead of completely ;-)

    But I'm not sure its that simple. Women are oppressed in most muslim countries, for sure. But is it specifically nakedness? What about naked men?

  40. great plan by maynard · · Score: 1

    Uh, hello aliens. This is what we look like. See, we're soft and squishy on the outside and crunchy on the inside. We still use radio waves to communicate and we can barely reach out of our atmospheric envelope. Hey, wanna come over and play?

    1. Re:great plan by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      And in ninety years the aliens come over to play and notice that the information *might* be a bit out of date.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    2. Re:great plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was apparently a story where this sort of thing happened. Two races at war. The star systemns were so far away from each other and the journey took sso long that by the time the attack from ether side was launched, the defence technology completely overwhelmed the attackers

  41. underwhelmed by the distance by khallow · · Score: 1

    45 lightyears isn't that much IMHO. If there is someone that close who can pick up our signals, then there's a good chance that they already have a presence in this Solar System. And they probably would be aware of us since we've already been broadcasting for more than 45 years. Those signals are no where near as strong, but if they're listening on the radio spectrum, then that's most of the way to being able to hear the more feeble broadcasts of 45 years ago.

    Even at a modest speed of 300 km/s (or 0.1% of the speed of light), something that can be achieved with nuclear propulsion or ion drives (especially if you use gravitation assists to get you up to speed), that would cover the distance in 45,000 years. We probably have the capability to do that now though obviously we don't have experience in keeping things intact for that long especially when exposed to cosmic rays.

    How much technology would it require to maintain a network of self-replicating von Neuman machines around each and every planemo around each and every star in the galaxy? My take is not that much. Anyone sufficiently curious that they'll pick up TV signals would IMHO be capable of that within a few thousand years.
  42. This article prompts two questions: by TempeTerra · · Score: 1

    Two important questions:

    1. Is contact with aliens going to signal the end of humanity as we know it at the hands of our new alien overlords?
    2. Are the presenters hot, and can I get a copy?

    --
    .evom ton seod gis eht
  43. Obligatory gag by Peet42 · · Score: 0

    "I for one welcome our new pervy overlords"

  44. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by rizole · · Score: 1

    Nothing to do with pronography then if nakedness==death.

  45. Attention Europeans! by Netsplitter · · Score: 1

    Ok, which one of you have a big, big antenna and a spare room?

  46. they would arrive before the signal is sent.... by BrentRJones · · Score: 2, Funny

    because they would be able to travel faster than light AND back in time

    In fact, the reason that so many UFOs were sighted in the early 50s was Earth TV was so interesting that many galaxies sent talent scouts. Of course, the reason we were never invited to the Universal Television Network was we only produced boring programming. (They made one exception and aired the first 5 seasons of Saturday Night Live.)

    --
    Help end the use of Sigs. Tomorrow
  47. But was it sent in PAL or NTSC? by Timo_UK · · Score: 1

    How are the aliens meant to receive this???

    --
    Timo's Audio Software http://www.esseraudio.com
  48. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew foreigners were weird, but you don't even take your clothes off to do it?

  49. Where's David Tennant when you really need him? by Prototerm · · Score: 1

    This is a really bad idea! Hasn't anyone there been watching Doctor Who? Sheesh, talk about putting us all at risk from giant reptilian pr0n collectors.

    --
    "My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right." --Senator Carl Schurz (1872)
  50. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by McDutchie · · Score: 4, Insightful
    You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

    That's actually not true. In other theocracies it's often the same or even worse.

  51. Super Advanced Alien TIVOs? by zotz · · Score: 1

    Personally, I wouldn't allow my works to be sent to them aliens as they may have super advanced alien TIVOs and abuse my copyrights.

    Then again, my copyrights will have run out by the time they see my works... Or will they still be in effect...

    All except my BY-SA and GPL and other Free works that is.

    all the best,

    drew
    http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=(creator%3 A%22drew%20Roberts%22)%20OR%20(collection%3A(ourme dia)%20AND%20%2Fmetadata%2Fauthor%3A(drew%20Robert s))

    --
    FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
  52. Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aliens will never kill humans. Aliens are essentially good. If they did attack us it would be in response to galactic imperialism from the evil earth run U.S. TV stations. When aliens level earth cities with death rays it is a good thing. When humans send TV into outer space it is neo-con airwave imperialism and is a bad thing. We should multiculturalise with the aliens and allow them to destroy everything on planet earth. Regards, Marxist Alien Lover

    1. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      Or they might just want to build an intergalactic superhighway and our planet might just be in the way.

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

    2. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      That was possibly the dumbest thing I've ever read on Slashdot, but let me take the premise seriously for a second: You're right -- aliens will never kill humans (or, more precisely, will never invade Earth). Why? Because it would be insanely expensive, slow (there's no FTL in the real universe), and provide no return on the investment. If they're short of resources, they can get them elsewhere for less trouble -- there's nothing special on Earth, from any possible alien perspective, except for our biology and culture. If they want lebensraum, they can get it more cheaply by terraforming or building space colonies. (Yes, without magical FTL, interstellar travel is that expensive.) There's just no money in interstellar invasion. The only possible motive for an alien attack would be irrational xenophobia... and I don't believe that any species rational enough to manage the near-impossible task of interstellar travel could be that irrational.

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    3. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I don't believe that any species rational enough to manage the near-impossible task of interstellar travel could be that irrational.

      I don't see why it would be so hard to believe. The only way the human race is going to stop fighting itself is to find something else to beat up

    4. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      How do you know there's no FTL? Maybe with a bit more advanced physics and a lot more advanced engineering it could be done. Maybe someone did it a log time ago, and spacefaring imperialistic civilisations can use their prebuilt system, or maybe something like an Alcubierre drive can be built to allow them to travel anywhere. And maybe the aliens are at the conquistador stage and have some economic/religious justification for imperialism, just like the conquistadors did. Or maybe they're at the V phase where a military government has a bunch of ships left over from wars and needs a new enemy to justify it's monopoly on power. Hell, maybe they're something like the 21st Century US phase, where the military has a bunch of hardware, and needs new enemies to avoid funding cuts, and the politicians have some benign but impractical ideas about spreading their political system to the universe.

      And in any case, imperialism is never rational for a whole society. But it may be rational for the individuals who get the state funds for the conquest, and a privileged place back home when it's complete.

      But we're talking about aliens so making assumptions about their reaction to discovering a less advanced culture is dangerous. By definition, their culture is possibly very different to ours. Still, even if they are very like us, human history has many examples of less advanced cultures being obliterated by their first contact with more advanced ones.

      Seems to me, sitting on a small planet and part of a relatively young and relatively enlightened civilisation, it's just not a very good idea to assume that you know anything about what's around in the rest of the universe. Or for that matter the rest of the planet.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    5. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      The human race is nowhere near capable of interstellar travel, and I don't believe it will even survive much longer without becoming more rational, much less reach the stars. Forunately, I also believe that -- overall -- we are becoming more rational. I'm an optimist.

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    6. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by The+Wicked+Priest · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sure, maybe FTL could happen -- but as things stand, there's no reason to believe it. And I don't. Current physics says it's impossible (read the fine print from those who suggest otherwise), and there's simply no reason to expect that to change. It's nothing but wishful thinking, and a plot device.

      I think it's equally silly to project the barbarisms of our own past (and sometimes present) onto a more technologically advanced alien culture. Culture and technology develop in tandem; while I'd be foolish to say that it was a lock step, or that I know how an alien society would develop, I just don't buy the idea of a huge moral gap. The more advanced your technology, the more potential for self-destruction; the more potential for self-destruction, the more self-restraint you have to employ. Hotheaded cultures wouldn't make it to the stars.

      Alien invasion makes for fine entertainment, for primitives like us. But that's all.

      --
      Share and Enjoy: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    7. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sure, maybe FTL could happen -- but as things stand, there's no reason to believe it. And I don't. Current physics says it's impossible (read the fine print from those who suggest otherwise), and there's simply no reason to expect that to change. It's nothing but wishful thinking, and a plot device.

      With the Alcubierre stuff, I agree. But Krasnikov tubes for example just sound like a really big engineering problem.

      I think it's equally silly to project the barbarisms of our own past (and sometimes present) onto a more technologically advanced alien culture. Culture and technology develop in tandem; while I'd be foolish to say that it was a lock step, or that I know how an alien society would develop, I just don't buy the idea of a huge moral gap. The more advanced your technology, the more potential for self-destruction; the more potential for self-destruction, the more self-restraint you have to employ. Hotheaded cultures wouldn't make it to the stars.

      Now that really is wishful thinking. Children don't have any reason to torment animals, and yet they do. If ants were conscious and hadn't met any children they'd likely make the same sort of arguments you make about more advanced creatures likely being more englightened.

      In fact it reminds me of Mars Attacks. The smug intellectual Pierce Brosnan character says something similar. The joke being that the martians don't seem to have any reason for attacking, except for a sick sense of humour. And the rabid general who seems like a liability at the start turns out to have been spot on all along.

      Liberals! Intellectuals! Peacemongers! IDIOTS!

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    8. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Children torment animals with sticks or stones, which aren't a particularly efficient tool for children to wipe huge numbers of other children out in a very short timescale.

      Yeah, but from they're very advanced technologically and intellectually compared to the the ants. I'm just making the point that advanced != enlightened.

      Consider Klingons[0] - technology and tempers like theirs simply don't mix; within minutes of any form of nuclear weapons existing on their planet, someone would have spilled someone's kha'la'xian[1] hyper-ale and they'd have blasted themselves to extinction.

      Must say I agree with that. Klingons don't seem to be plausible as a technologically advanced culture for the reasons you say. Like all the StarTrek aliens, they are also far too homogenous, to they point that they are a cliche.

      But with regards to Nuclear weapons, lots of highly unenlightened Earth societies did develop them (Russians, Chinese) or could have (Nazis). They were fairly vicious to undesirables inside the country, and to neighbouring countries, but they weren't as anarchic as the Klingons. But you'd be in deep shit if the aliens you contacted were anything like any of those cultures.

      And even if developing technology requires some level of civilisation, it's possible that an uncivilised culture could take over and inherit the technology, like the Romans did with the Greeks, or a hypothetical American Empire could do to the American Republic. Sure they'd be somewhat stagnant, but they'd still retain the technology they inherited. In fact, I think you could make a strong argument that the Nazis were an example of inheriting technology from a more civilised democratic era - when you read about how science was in WWII under the Nazis (e.g. banning 'Jewish physics', funding expeditions to prove crazy racial theories as fact), it seems as if it would have probably stagnated if they won.

      Come to think of it, if they had won, they would probably have ended up as a sort of 21st Century Roman empire, with Russian and Polish slaves toiling away for German masters, and that is a social system which is pretty much guaranteed to produce technological stagnation. But if they'd have got to the nuclear stage, all that wouldn't have mattered, since they would have the ability to deter conflict with say the US, and that sort of conflict was probably the only thing which would have threatened the regime.

      Interestingly enough, when I was in Germany, someone made the same point about North Korea. He said that the Germans build V2 rockets in a few months in WWII whilst the country was being bombed to bits, but 60 years of research and development in North Korea in peacetime, funded by presumably huge sums of money, had only managed to improve Scud range marginally compared to the V2. If you compare it to the development in the US that went from V2s to ICBMs in a few years, it's almost comically slow.

      Why are you stuck posting at -1 BTW?

      There isn't any moderation on any of your posts as far as I can see, and none of them seem to be particularly rude or offensive. What happened? Are you a victim of oppression?

      Mods: Please mod parent up "+1 Underrated"

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    9. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > lots of highly unenlightened Earth societies did develop them (Russians, Chinese)

      Wow. Just wow.

      > American Empire

      Here we go.

      > development in the US that went from V2s to ICBMs in a few years

      Absolutely the best, of course. ...

      You are very lucky that arrogance and stupidity don't hurt.

    10. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      >> lots of highly unenlightened Earth societies did develop them (Russians, Chinese)
      > Wow. Just wow.

      What are you wowing about. Both the Russians and the Chinese were ruled by governments that killed tens of millions of their own civilians in peacetime, and invaded their neighbours to spread the regime. If that's not unenlightened, I don't know what is.

      >> American empire
      > Here we go.

      You realise that I'm saying that a transition from a republic to an empire is a bad thing, comparable to the transition from Weimar to the Nazis, right? Or do you just flame bad word combinations without bothering to check their context.

      >> development in the US that went from V2s to ICBMs in a few years
      >Absolutely the best, of course. ...

      Actually, at the "going from V2 to functional ICBM system" benchmark, the US is absolutely the best. Faster than the Russians or Chinese, and even if the North Korean tested an ICBM tomorrow, it would still have taken them 6x as long as the US did.

      > You are very lucky that arrogance and stupidity don't hurt.

      You what? Since I'm not American, how can claiming that America is better than some slave state be arrogance?

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    11. Re:Leftist Apologia for Aliens by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 0

      The old cliche is that the American German Scientists were better than the Russian German Scientists.

      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
  53. Be young, please by Ice+Wewe · · Score: 1

    Ok, but if you don't want the aliens running away screaming, make sure they're hot! The last thing aliens need to see is some old guy talking about how great earth is. Speaking of which, how can someone recieve this broadcast?

  54. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I never understood why it is so wrong for a woman to show her bare nipples in public. I mean, think for a second: it's not the breast per se that is, apparently, immoral, but rather the nipple, since it seems to be ok to show all the other parts of the breast that don't fit into bikini tops -- since those are nothing more than a skimpy triangle of fabric these days, and breasts tend to, uh, overflow it -- or show lots and lots of cleavage aided by {wonder,push}-bras that practically point those things at us. So, clearly, the "forbidden fruit" must be the nipple.

    Strangely enough, showing male nipples doesn't seem to offend anyone.

    This double standard is really hard to understand. What is so dirty and foul with a woman's nipple that makes it socially unacceptable to show in public, while the male counterpart isn't given as much as a frown? For the life of me, I could /never/ understand why it is so. Stupidity, perhaps?

  55. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by IWannaBeAnAC · · Score: 2, Informative
    Scary, you never did computer science 101, you don't even know what 'equivalence' means?

    Either that, or you never get undressed without having sex in the process.

  56. Paid or Ad based? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will the aliens have to pay for this service or will it be ad supported? If its free, I'm going to get really pissed! Here, in the good ol' USA, we have to pay $35 a month for low end cable TV, and if I want to see naked people, thats adds a LOT $$$ extra!!! The tv program they are talking about has 2 naked hosts, and its free!!! How cool is that? While on the subject of aliens, will this "intergalactic" tv be acciessibele to the aliens that crosses the border illegally as well? I have to say its good to be an alien (intergalactic or not) these days ;-)

  57. Alien senses by rubberbando · · Score: 1

    One of the other problems that might occur is the possibility that the recieving aliens don't have the same sensory organs/functions that we do. Even if they found a satelite of ours with an audio recording, what good would it do if they didn't have the ability to detect/interpet sound waves the same way we do? The same could be said for visual recordings. They might not 'see' the same spectrums of light that we do and not be able to see anything on a screen. For all we know, they could only hear magnetic waves and only see sound waves.

    Its funny how arrogant mankind is in thinking that any alien species would be anything like him.

    First contact will most likely come without any warning and huge communication and culture barriers will occur.

    Hopefully both parties will have the patience and understanding to make it work.

    --
    DEAD DEAD DEAD DELETE ME
    1. Re:Alien senses by Urza9814 · · Score: 1

      Hopefully one of the other differences is that they think bullets feel good...

    2. Re:Alien senses by oohshiny · · Score: 1

      what good would it do if they didn't have the ability to detect/interpet sound waves the same way we do? The same could be said for visual recordings. They might not 'see' the same spectrums of light that we do and not be able to see anything on a screen.

      That would be a problem if we sent them an actual television set, but we're sending them a television signal: an abstract encoding of 2D information. They can translate that into whatever 2D representation they want.

      For all we know, they could only hear magnetic waves and only see sound waves.

      Physics gives fairly little leeway in terms of what senses biological species can usefully have. Most intelligent alien species will probably have vision that's pretty similar to humans.

  58. Absolutely stupid assholes by tdavie · · Score: 1

    We should be comvincing anything that is out there of our overwhelming military superiority, and out unwavering willingness to destroy anything that does not submit to our demands. Anything less is courting disaster. Tom

    1. Re:Absolutely stupid assholes by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Please, Mr. President. You've done enough already.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  59. Sue them by houghi · · Score: 1

    The **AA must be thrilled to have several billion more planets to sue.

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  60. Actual hidden message content for ferrengis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    We are top officials of the federal goverment contracts review panel who are interested in importation of goods into our country with funds which are presently trapped in nigeria. in order to commence this business we solicit your a assistance to enable us to transfer into your account the said trapped funds.

    (...)

    And wait for the gold pressed latinum bars.

  61. Re: TV in 90 Years by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Some Movie/Book (Contact?) pointed out that the wakeup signal would have been Hitler presenting the Olympics using his new technology, back in the days when he was just a Rabbler. Let's just suppose we give them a 15 year period to figure this out. ("BlieepHHOONK, someone get an antenna, that was a signal").

    That means our best shot was the 1950's, when we disposed of that "Ugly War Stuff" and settled down to a nice decade of TV. 1950 + 90 = 2040. They'll have made their minds up long before a random Euro show from 2006 shows up. Take it away, Lucille Ball.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  62. "Star in Big Dipper"? Errai is in Cepheus. by Explo · · Score: 2, Informative

    Being an hopeless astronomy freak, I couldn't help noticing that the article doesn't quite appear to know where they're actually sending the broadcast. On the beginning on the article they're talking about sending the broadcast to a star in Big Dipper. Later, the name of the star turns out to be Errai. All is fine and dandy, except that the Errai resides in Cepheus.

    Article does not mention why that particular star was selected, however, it appears to host a known exoplanet, which is quite probably the reason here. Errai also happens to be somewhat more massive than our sun, which means that it progresses through its 'life' faster than the Sol. Any possible life out there has less time to evolve before the star kicks the bucket. It's also a double star, which may make the orbits of the planet(s) in the system somewhat more chaotic.

    --
    Everyone who makes generalizations should be shot.
    1. Re:"Star in Big Dipper"? Errai is in Cepheus. by jiawen · · Score: 1

      Wikipedia on Errai and its companion.

  63. O_O by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    I suppose our science, medicine, cities, culture is not interesting to aliens.

    They'd much prefer to see us waving our private parts on front of the camera. Yea, that's gotta do it.

  64. No, it's because of social norms on nudity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because American people are always obese, and European people are always thin and fit?

    No, because Europeans couldn't give a rat's arse about nudity, whereas Americans are hung up about it. Long gone are the days when nudity at the beach was confined to poor isolated spots in Europe, it's now accepted extremely widely in almost all the hot sand and sea countries, and even poolside (but less so). And that has an impact on how nudity is perceived on television too.

    Actually, much worse than Americans being merely hung up about it, public nudity is not protected in the US except as a means of political protest, and even then it's de facto illegal because the local police in every state will immediately put you in the clinker under random charges. It gets dismissed in the courts if you contest it (and if you don't contest it then you get fined), but despite court dismissal it's still effectively barred by the enforcement arm.

    Naturists (and even the US women's TopFree movement) have been trying for decades to get an actual ruling on the subject, but the courts just won't let it come to a judgement, too fearful of bucking the the status quo. It was bad enough even before Bush, but now that the US is a fundamentalist religious state, the chances of removing de facto social inhibitions are even more remote.

    That's America for you. Land of the non-free.

    1. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      "the US is a fundamentalist religious state"

      It is? I gotta get outta here.

      What?

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    2. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by LunarCrisis · · Score: 1

      That would be believable if the word flabby had not been emphasised using italics (or lack thereof).

      Not that I'm trying to support the first response to the joke, I found it quite funny. =)

      --
      Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
      Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
    3. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it is, but let's not go there, eh?

    4. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the program will discuss our Us vs. Them mentality?

      I'm going to start sucker punching people who compare Europe with the US, as if one is better than the other.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    5. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by Lex-Man82 · · Score: 1

      Yeah there both rubbish!

    6. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      "there" .. is that the American spelling?

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    7. Re:No, it's because of social norms on nudity by Lex-Man82 · · Score: 1

      I don't know I'm English.

  65. So, do the aliens use PAL or NTSC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or maybe DVB-T?

  66. Possibly not 90 years by Malakusen · · Score: 1

    If they have the ability to communicate at FTL speeds, it would only take as long as it takes for our signal to get there, then potentially a faster response back.

    --
    Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to conviction
  67. How THAT Will Go Down by Greyfox · · Score: 2, Funny
    The aliens will interpret the message as a declaration of war (Why else would those pink monkey things be shaking their genetaila at us?!) and build a vast fleet of planet-buster bombs which they will launch at us at sub-light speeds. In the hundreds of years they take to reach their destination they'll decode more of our signals and realize that we want to be freinds. Unfortunately, no one having thought to build a self-destruct into their armada of doom, their sole transmition to us will be "Freinds... oops, our bad..." which will arrive moments before their fleet destroys everything in our solar system.

    Or maybe not...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  68. Just because by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because we send out a message at c doesn't mean it will be returned at c. For all we know they could have already responded we just don't have the technology to listen.

    And maybe we should be researching practical ways to achieve FTL electronic broadcasts?

    Lastly, assuming something does hear us. Are we sure society is ready for intergalactic relationships?

  69. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Pedrito · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

    Au contraire, we share that distinction with a number of other countries that have their governments controlled by strong fundamentalist religious groups.

  70. Re: Asteroid impact ? No muss? by zmollusc · · Score: 1

    Why would they want the place covered in crap for years? Anybody capable of getting here could just lease their technology to us, then buy our governments just like any other big corporation.

    --
    They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  71. Re:This is cute but you don't need to look so far by DoorFrame · · Score: 1

    And the "projections" of these "hyperdimensional" beings into our universe... they don't look like mice, by any chance, do they?

  72. Very important message to include: by unstable23 · · Score: 1

    "All your base are belong to us."

    That should get their attention.

  73. Naked Presenters... by TheVelvetFlamebait · · Score: 1

    Aside from the obvious compatibility issues, doesn't it strike anyone as kinda stupid that these presenters are naked? I mean, by far and away, most human cultures have some form of clothing. It may not be more natural, and it may not show our bodies accurately, but that's who we are. If these aliens want to make contact, that's is what to expect.

    --
    You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
  74. What a waste... by v1456vqe · · Score: 1

    This is a sheer waste of effort and money..

  75. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean as a message to stop probing us? Or as an invite to do some more?

  76. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

    You've obviously never been to the Middle East.

  77. naivite: yours by oohshiny · · Score: 1

    Why do people continue to delude themselves that an alien intelligence will be able to comprehend communication as we consider it?

    Because it's quite likely that intelligent alien life is DNA, RNA, and protein based, has developed vision, has developed color vision, communicates with a linear stream of symbols, and has two sexes. In fact, there's a good chance that it has a body plan similar to ours, is bipedal, and uses sound to communicate. How do we know that? Because a lot of what we are is determined by physics, and many of these features have developed multiple times in evolution.

    It's also quite likely that if there is any concurrent alien civilization at all capable of receiving our signals, they are millions of years old and have no interest in colonizing earth (because otherwise, they would have done so). It's just as likely that intelligent species, as a rule, exist as technologically advanced species for only a few hundred to a few thousand years, in which case there are not going to be any concurrent alien civilizations capable of receiving our signals.

    We are a crippled duck, currently hidden in a vast swamp. Our only security being through obscurity. Why the hell do people insist on flailing around screaming for the hunters?

    Now you're deluding yourself: you're deluding yourself into thinking that it is worth traveling 45 light years to do--what exactly? Eat us? Enslave us? Colonize earth? Blow it up? If any civilization has figured out how to send any substantial object (weapon, crew, colony ship) 45 light years towards earth, they have so much energy available to them that they don't need to fear us and that they don't need to bother with colonizing earth either. And that works in reverse, too: by the time we have figured out how to travel 45 light years, we have the energy to either annihilate ourselves completely if we aren't peaceful, or to travel purely out of scientific curiosity, since whatever resource or colonization needs we have, we can more easily satisfy in the solar system.

    We're about as much of a "threat" to these people as some native tribe of cannibals in New Guinea is to your average suburban Chicago housewife. On the whole, it doesn't matter whether we let them know that we're here; they probably alread know and eitherthey don't care, or they are waiting with first contact. Of course, the most likely possibility is that they simply don't exist and that we're alone.

    1. Re:naivite: yours by fitten · · Score: 1

      It's also quite likely that if there is any concurrent alien civilization at all capable of receiving our signals, they are millions of years old and have no interest in colonizing earth (because otherwise, they would have done so). It's just as likely that intelligent species, as a rule, exist as technologically advanced species for only a few hundred to a few thousand years, in which case there are not going to be any concurrent alien civilizations capable of receiving our signals.

      That's the good thing about 'averages'. You never know. We could have received extraterrestrial signals back in the 1950s but we didn't know what to look for or record them or even how to decode them so we missed them. I agree with you, though, the odds of a concurrent civilization to ours is fairly remote. However, what if it takes as long as Earth has been around, on average, for intelligent life to come about? That would make it more likely, I'd think, for concurrent civilizations to exist since all of the ecosystems started at 'nearly' the same time. As far as making 'rules' of how long technologically advanced species are around for... I don't know how we make a 'rule' for something we've never witnessed or experienced... only speculated about.

    2. Re:naivite: yours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Because it's quite likely that intelligent alien life is DNA, RNA, and protein based, has developed vision, has developed color vision, communicates with a linear stream of symbols, and has two sexes. In fact, there's a good chance that it has a body plan similar to ours, is bipedal, and uses sound to communicate. How do we know that? Because a lot of what we are is determined by physics, and many of these features have developed multiple times in evolution."

      Who's to say what evolution could come up with based on the sulphur-metabolising bacteria found in caves? A species that is based underground in caves isn't likely to have vision, probably would use something better for climbing than bipedalism*, and as for your two-genders idea there are some rather complex hermaphrodite creatures on Earth - it's an equally effective way to reproduce. There is a vast universe of possible arrangements for life - yes, we know that our particular arrangement works for us, but given the variety of conditions that life might develop in and the many unknowns in the process it's madness to claim that you have a handle on the relative probabilities of humanoid vs other types of intelligent life.

      *Supposedly, we're only bipeds because we needed the height to cool our brains. In a uniform-temperature cave that doesn't apply.

    3. Re:naivite: yours by oohshiny · · Score: 1

      However, what if it takes as long as Earth has been around, on average, for intelligent life to come about?

      Given what we know about the history of life on earth, there is no reason why humanity couldn't have appeared hundreds of millions of years earlier or later.

      That would make it more likely, I'd think, for concurrent civilizations to exist since all of the ecosystems started at 'nearly' the same time.

      The universe is somehwere upwards of 13 billion years old, the solar system is somewhere around 4.5 billion years old. Other "third generation" solar systems like our own may be at least several billion years older, meaning that there is no reason why life should be particularly synchronized throughout the galaxy.

    4. Re:naivite: yours by oohshiny · · Score: 1

      Who's to say what evolution could come up with based on the sulphur-metabolising bacteria found in caves?

      There isn't enough chemical energy there to support intelligent life.

      probably would use something better for climbing than bipedalism [...] *Supposedly, we're only bipeds because we needed the height to cool our brains. In a uniform-temperature cave that doesn't apply.

      We use bipedalism because it's energy efficient.

      A species that is based underground in caves isn't likely to have vision,

      And it probably doesn't have a need for a big brain either.

      and as for your two-genders idea there are some rather complex hermaphrodite creatures on Earth - it's an equally effective way to reproduce

      No, from biology we know that it is not an "equally effective way to reproduce".

      There is a vast universe of possible arrangements for life - yes, we know that our particular arrangement works for us, but given the variety of conditions that life might develop in and the many unknowns in the process it's madness to claim that you have a handle on the relative probabilities of humanoid vs other types of intelligent life.

      Biologists have analyzed tens of thousands of species and the evolution of thousands of sensory organs, reproductive strategies, and locomotive strategies. Nobody can make definitive statements about xenobiology from that, but we've gotten a pretty good idea from that what kinds of solutions evolution comes up with. And it turns out that physics and biology leave a lot less room for variation than the imagination of science fiction writers.

    5. Re:naivite: yours by Fengpost · · Score: 1

      If the difference between us and the aliens are analogous of the difference between the cannibals in New Guinea and housewife in Chicago that would be great. But if the relative difference is on the scale of human and ants, that would be a problem. Consider the poossible technological and cultural difference, it is a higher possibility.

      Do you ever feel guilty or care about stepping on some ants? If the ants become a nuisance, you will probably call the exterminator. I shudder to think what would happen if the inetrstellar exterminator shows up on our doorstep.

      --
      The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity....Calvin
  78. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  79. Futurama by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    Futurama made a joke about aliens geting a tv show that was broadcast about 1000 years ago

  80. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reduce traffic-density by at least (all seats in your car - the empty seats) / the empty seats in your car times.

    Huh? How do you reduce traffic density by one third times?

    [Perhaps you were trying to say (total seats / occupied seats).]

  81. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Really? so it's 100% ok for women to go naken or barely clothed in muslim countries?

    -1, Offtopic. The GP is talking about nudity being considered pornography, not about the alrightness of being naked. So to use your idea, do people in muslim countries consider that pictures of naked people are pornography? I don't know, you most likely don't know and nobody cares anyways.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  82. Clothing is part of our phenotype by noidentity · · Score: 1
    Clothes, too, are part of the extended phenotype of Homo sapiens in almost every niche inhabited by that species. An illustrated encyclopedia of zoology should no more picture Homo sapiens naked than it should picture Ursus arctus - the black bear - wearing a clown suit and riding a bicycle..

    - Daniel Dennett, Consciousness Explained

  83. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    I knew foreigners were weird, but you don't even take your clothes off to do it?

    lol, that's just like when I try to make some smart ass remark but then I realize that I didn't get it right and that my remark would only make me sound dumb. Basically what you said is just as if the GP had said "Oregon is in the USA" and that you replied, "So the USA are in Oregon?".

    The GP says that nudity is considered pornography in the USA, not that pornography consists in nudity.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  84. I want to watch this show by johansalk · · Score: 1

    Anyonw knows how?

  85. Or, worse- by Maxmin · · Score: 1

    "Mmmmm, don't they look delicious! Let's jump into the saucer and head on down to that part of the galaxy. And hey, could you grab that cookbook on the counter?"

    --
    O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
    1. Re:Or, worse- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the book titled "To Serve Man" ...

  86. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 0, Troll

    That's actually not true. In other theocracies it's often the same or even worse.

    Wait a minute, where on earth have you heard that under such regimes people consider that nudity is pornography? Where? As I told some other poster, we're not talking about how well/bad nudity is received, but rather what it is considered to be, in nature. It's not because you force women to hide themselves that you consider that the depiction of nudity is pornography. Not that I'm saying that in such countries people don't consider nuidty to be pornography, but I yet have to hear anyone from such a country claiming such a thing, as you can hear all the time americans considered that nudity is porn. When I think about it I even remember an american saying that the picture of a naked baby right next to a banner for a soft porn site made it turn into child porn, heh. A child + porn = child porn! ;-)

    PS : oh crap, you got modded up for that? lol

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  87. Do we even know by YetAnotherBob · · Score: 1

    if there are planets on the target star? Seems like they should have checked that, at least.

    If not, then it's just a stunt. A way to get an audience for what would be a flop otherwise. At that distance, they might at least know if there is a solar system there.

    --
    Everybody knows 3 people with my name.
  88. Now I can sleep at night by Illserve · · Score: 1

    I was wondering how someone would manage to cram a dig at Americans into this story, thanks to both of you for your tag-team effort.

    This post isn't even that funny or insightful really. That it's gotten modded up to 5 so quickly says a great deal about the seething anti-American sentiment in the mod community! Not that one couldn't tell by reading a global warming story. Any post that ends with "America Sux" hit +5 in seconds.

    Not that I'm one to defend America's current stupidity, but the bias here is so over the top that it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

    1. Re:Now I can sleep at night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't like it?

      Leave.

    2. Re:Now I can sleep at night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back to fark with you

    3. Re:Now I can sleep at night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get the fuck over yourself, you sad whiny bastard.

      There's always someone like you, who'll take any chance to be offended and run with it.

      Here's a clue for ya: Nobody cares if you're offended by some random bit of text on the internet. Nobody cares if you take an insightful point made in the context of a discussion to be a personal slight.

      You are not that important.

  89. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    I think it has to do with the erogenousity (or something of this kind) of the female nipple, and/or maybe lactation. Basically, girls are supposed to have "fun" out of their nipples, some even can orgasm just from having it stimulated, as men are not supposed to feel anything in their nipples.

    The funny thing tho is how children are not supposed to see boobs (including nipples), as if it could shock them, as babies suck nipples and grab their mother's boob.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  90. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Au contraire, we share that distinction with a number of other countries that have their governments controlled by strong fundamentalist religious groups.

    You are the third person I see replying to the GP by simply comparing the USA to such countries. Why are americans always comparing themselves with countries they're at war with? Oh well that may have to do with americans hardly knowing anything about countries they're not at war with ;-) but anyways, in this very topic, why are you guys even talking about these countries? Like I already told the two other persons who made such a comment, here we are talking about what nudity is considered to be, not how alright it is considered to be. When have you ever heard of people from such countries considering nudity to be pornography? I haven't, ever.

    I guess it was just one more of these "Maybe we're bad, but we're so much better then teh terrists!!1" posts.

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  91. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    You've obviously never been to the Middle East.

    Goddamn wtf's wrong with all you people, it's all about what nudity is considered to be, not how alright nudity is, damnit. Why you guys always gotta point out that in the USA it's so less worse than in the Middle East? By lack of something worse than you to compare yourself to?

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  92. Copyright by babbling · · Score: 1

    Or fuck them over with a huge number of copyright infringement lawsuits. Those pirate aliens are probably recording everything!

  93. Waste of effort, send a beep by Warbothong · · Score: 1

    I agree with the many people saying that any alien intelligence probably would not be able to decode such a transmission, but the transmission itself is all that is required, not the specifics of the contents. (Mind you, we have been sending these out for years anyway) If any communication with a completely unknown alien intelligence is ever attempted then it will have to start with the lowest common denominators; the most likely ones being transmission type and maths. What I mean is that using radio waves to encode a 2D representation of 3D space using light and sound in a format designed for Earth-based electronic boxes in a language arbitrarily created over hundreds of years (many native speakers of which still do not understand it fully) has so many assumptions made about the recipient that any significant response would be as likely to occur on YouTube as sent through space back to us in a format we understand. Therefore the common denominators are maths, because that is a universal truth outside the realms of physics (who cares whether in a different universe electrons have a slightly different charge? a^2 + b^2 = c^2 will still apply to right angled triangles), and the medium of transmission (since anybody receiving a radio broadcast comprehends radio, anyone recieving laser transmissions comprehends lasers. If the aliens don't understand radio/lasers/whatever-else-is-used then it doesn't matter because they won't acknowledge the existance of the transmission anyway). Once contact is made then a common language/encoding can be built up (picture the difficulty of communication during live satellite news interviews, but multiplied by a hell of a lot) This reminds me of a TV drama/documentary exploring what might happen if alien intelligence is discovered. An astronomy centre on Earth picks up a repeating source of energy that they think is a pulsar, but it turns out to be a directed laser beam pulsing on and off in a ratio of pi (ie. on for an arbitrary length, off, on for the same length, off, on for the same length, off, on for 0.1415927...... of that length). It turned out that Earth's broadcasts had reached an alien intelligence lightyears away, and through their detection of the radio waves' source they had crafted a response (so the content didn't matter, just the radio signal itself) using lasers to reduce the power output needed. This pi signal had been received for decades, but nobody noticed it, and it was only when one bright young researcher sent a duplicate response that things started getting interesting, with a whole new language of mathematics encoded in laser pulses being built up as a common medium of communication between the two races (thus we learnt whole new ways of applying maths which the aliens had developed centuries earlier, that lead to new technology utilising this maths, etc. [for those who watch the Fast Show, imagine the implications of Dexter Math!]) and at no point did the transmissions contain naked people, pretty pictures of flowers or anything else which assumes something outside of maths and lasers (although it is theoretically possible that over a vast timeframe the transmissions' complexity could have built up enough to transmit something like this, that would be making assumptions about sight, sound and other perceptions. I mean, even cats get confused by a mirror for god's sake!) So in summary, they won't understand what is in the transmission, so just send anything mathematical that can be easily understood, keep sending it over and over, use radio waves to broadcast across the galaxy but switch to lasers when a recipient is pinpointed... oh, and remember to employ plenty of bright, young researchers (my CV is attached......) PS: Thank you /. for obliterating my formatting and making me look like a dumbass

  94. There's hosting the show naked... by afabbro · · Score: 1

    ...so as not to offend the Ferengi.

    --
    Advice: on VPS providers
  95. Maybe they will interpret the message as by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An invite to build an intergalactic bypass.............

  96. Well... by Elbowgeek · · Score: 1
    is it really a good idea to teach potentially hostile aliens about how we work (and by extension how to kill us)?

    By now, they've no doubt concluded that all they have to do is wait another couple hundred years for us do the deed ourselves, thereby saving the aliens a bundle on the cost of deploying military assets.

    Cheers

    --
    Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
  97. Proving a negative by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    unreachably distant point of light

    Unreachable for us. Maybe not unreachable for them.

    IMHO, what we don't know about physics is probably much larger than what we do know. And any civilization with a few million years to sit around and think about it might know more about the topic than us.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
  98. The problem is. . . by mianne · · Score: 1

    Any civilization 45 light years away is currently watching broadcasts of "My Mother The Car." As a result, they've probably concluded that this planet must be destroyed for the survival of the galaxy.

    --
    Javascript, cookies, flash, and ActiveX must be enabled in order to view this sig.
  99. Hope the **AA doesn't hear about this. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If that **AA hears about this then we'll be forced to slap some DRM on it to make sure them aliens don't copy it. BTW, I think we would also have to FedEx them a player.

  100. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Either that, or you never get undressed without having sex in the process.

    I have very sensitive skin, you insensitive clod.

  101. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never thought I would say this to someone, but you really need to get your nipples licked... they definitely are erogenous for men too.

    Shave your chest first though!

    The male vs female toplessness thing is more about history and the gender power imbalance. Men used to exclusively do the kind of manual labour that requires going shirtless to stay cool, women were supposed to stay at home, wrapped up in a way that ensured only their husband/owners ever even saw their ankles.

  102. musketmen battleships by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Would it really matter if a society like 18th century Europe gave any info to a foe as advanced as the current US military"

    Yes it would. The legions of musket men would destroy the US navy in a matter of seconds. Yes, this is a video game joke. No, I didn't read the article at all.

  103. What? by retro128 · · Score: 1

    I RTFA'ed. I hope the aliens don't see the broadcast. They'll probably send a planetbuster back. I mean, let's say I'm an alien and I get this signal beamed over to me. I have no cipher to decode it, unlike that pretty gold disc that was picked up in interstellar space last week, so I put my scientists on the case and they spend many, many moons decoding the signal. But now they're talking in a language I can't understand. Now I have to study cues in the video for years to try to figure out what they're saying. Finally, I get it. Then I hear: "We have seen your crop cicles. Stop by and say hello." You fucking bet I'd push the button.

    The only redeeming value about this broadcast is that there's an off chance of a human sexuality demonstration. Pr0n made for aliens is something I don't have in my archives yet.

    --
    -R
    1. Re:What? by tgrigsby · · Score: 1

      Amen. That's got to be the stupidest damn thing I've read in a long time. "We have seen your crop circles. Stop by and say hello." I'd be more impressed if it continued, "And then we'd like to chat about how you're going to reimburse the farmers for the damage."

      Intergalactic gang signs, that's what they are....

      --
      *** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
  104. To Serve Man by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    We should make sure to tell our alien viewers that we can be harmed only by feeding us a few ounces of the finest chocolate or by frequent blowjobs.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:To Serve Man by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      I, personally, don't want to be sucked by them.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  105. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by SeaFox · · Score: 1
    Just imagine a dog or a lizard trying to get you turned on? (or a fat chick)

    You really don't spend much time on the underbelly of the Internet, do you? All of these have porn sites dedicated to them (not that I personally am interested, but you come across stuff).
  106. I'll wait. . . by Hamoohead · · Score: 1

    for the South Park version.

    --
    "If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
  107. Foreign language courses. by Pentomino · · Score: 1

    I was watching French in Action a few years ago, and thought that this might be a good way to introduce an alien species to humanity and a particular culture. It's a foreign language telecourse that's produced entirely in the target language of French, so in order to be effective, it needs to demonstrate the usage of the language, as well as every concept a human being needs to talk about. The only problem is that this approach would inevitably focus on one culture, no matter which language you choose.

    I do agree that it's completely pointless to send out a single one-time message. It seriously needs to repeat many times, for a long time. Who would pay for that?

  108. WTF is "broadcast towards a point"? by mi · · Score: 1
    broadcast of a program conceived for aliens and broadcast towards a point 45 light years away

    Granted, the directional signal will get noticably broader by the time it reaches the destination, but does not anyone else see the term as self-inconsistent?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  109. Sounds like a loophole for airing a porn channel by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and perhaps we should broadcast this to people on earth to see if there are aliens amongst us?

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  110. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 1
    You really don't spend much time on the underbelly of the Internet, do you?
    I'm too busy having sex with my girlfriend or posting on Slashdot...
    --
    I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
  111. perhaps a response in 45 years by llZENll · · Score: 1

    just because our transmission technology goes light speed doesn't mean a faster transmission method doesn't exist.

  112. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by X86Daddy · · Score: 1

    You should realize, the equivalence nakedness == pornography is virtually unique to the USA.

    No, no, no; some third world, war-zone theocracies of the middle east and africa are with us in that particular bit of cultural enlightenment.

  113. Why am I sticky and naked? by dangitman · · Score: 1

    Did I miss something fun?

    --
    ... and then they built the supercollider.
  114. Intergalactic ? by PigIronBob · · Score: 1

    Intergalactic? Interstellar at best. get your astronomical terms right: solar system: Big Interstellar space: bigger Intergalactic space: freaking humungous

    --
    You never catch me alive
  115. Bad time calculations by Garse+Janacek · · Score: 1

    We will have to wait 90 years to learn whether or not some lifeform was listening.

    Wrong! They've discovered faster-than-light travel ages ago. We'll only need ~50 years.

    Although even this is presumptuous: it doesn't tell us whether someone was listening, but whether, after listening, they still wanted to talk to us.

    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -- Calvin

    --

    I am the man with no sig!

  116. Should We Advertise Our Presence? by aldheorte · · Score: 1

    In one of Jared Diamond's books, I think maybe the Third Chimpanzee, he makes an interesting point, after discussiong how human civilizations glady overwhelmed and exploited any other civilizations of which they became aware and had the capacity to do so, that sending out messages to alien civilizations (let's dodge the question of whether any actually exist since anyone sending a message implicitly assumes they probably do) represents pure folly given our lack of technological prowess.

    Should people really broadcast these messages until we have at least mastered interplanetary war and perhaps colonized another solar system, by force if necessary? Given human history and assuming continued scientific progress two things are pretty apparent:

    1. We'll eventually cross to new worlds and even solar systems.
    2. We'll destroy anything that stands in our way.

    Somehow I suspect that any sufficiently advanced technological civilization, human or otherwise, would have the same priorities. To be honest, I'm not too terribly concerned about this transmission reaching anything, but it's a valid question and shows a bit of hubris on the part of the broadcasters to the rest of humanity. It's in the best interest of any civlization to establish contact when and only when they have gained the upperhand technologically. The only thing humanity has as a signficant dissuading technology right now is the possibility of nuking itself, with no offensive capabilities whatsoever.

    1. Re:Should We Advertise Our Presence? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      but how would we know we have the upper hand if we never contact anyone?

      It also assumes that other species does not understand or believe in altruism. They may even be like something we never even thought of.

      The native Americans could have slaughtered the first settlers, but didn't.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  117. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    they definitely are erogenous for men too.

    haha I know but look at what I said more closely : "Basically, girls are supposed to have "fun" out of their nipples, some even can orgasm just from having it stimulated, as men are not supposed to feel anything in their nipples."

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  118. Maybe... by Junta · · Score: 1

    If the alien happened to be Admiral ZEX...

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  119. Reply: InterGalactic Goatse.cx 90 years later by littlewink · · Score: 1

    I sure hope they don't send any pictures of fat broads.

  120. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not because you force women to hide themselves that you consider that the depiction of nudity is pornography.

    Why the hell do you think they ban nudity? It's because they consider nudity sexual.

  121. Meanwhile in the alien observatory by amavida · · Score: 1

    Alien astonomer calls up his wife : "Hey Honey! They're advertising a new fast food joint over in Sol sytem, let's go there for dinner after work ok?"

  122. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Why the hell do you think they ban nudity? It's because they consider nudity sexual.

    Wait, here we're not talking about being naked but nudity depictions being considered pornography. My point is, what the hell does anyone know about what people in Iran for example think about for example artistic nude?

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  123. Reply 45 years later... by amavida · · Score: 1

    ... my mommy say's i'm not allowed to talk to strangers....

  124. Reality TV by FoXDie · · Score: 1

    So in 45 years extraterrestials can get sick of reality TV too!

  125. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    "My point is, what the hell does anyone know about what people in Iran for example think about for example artistic nude?"

    There are people in Iran who would consider *any* representational art to be an abomination, let alone, representing a nude figure. There are also people in Iran whose personal attitudes about such things would be similar to the typical person in, say, Switzerland.

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  126. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by fishbowl · · Score: 1


    "No, no, no; some third world, war-zone theocracies of the middle east and africa are with us in that particular bit of cultural enlightenment."

    Also, much of Europe. Possibly, *most* of Europe. The places that are tolerant of nudity are *so* tolerant, some going as far as to practically make it mandatory in various situations, balance out the vast swaths of the continent where the attitudes are more or less like the US. At least in the US, there are large numbers of people who don't actually have this kind of attitude that's attributed to the US as a whole. Look at India, China, the Middle East, or Mexico for example (Just try going topless at a hot spring in Mexico... They *DO NOT* tolerate that sort of thing.)

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  127. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    send those aliens goatse.cx.

    Uhm, it was an alien who took the photo.

  128. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
    it's all about what nudity is considered to be, not how alright nudity is
    1. Proposition: pornography == bad.
    2. Corollary: !pornography == good.
    3. Theorem: if nudity == pornography then nudity == bad.

    QED.

    In other words, for many people (namely, the ones who accept proposition #1), the two issues you are trying to separate are equivalent.

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  129. Exoplanet was not the reason by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 1

    The exoplanet was detected in 1989, then retracted, and then the retraction was retracted. Appearantly.

    --

    Stop the brainwash

  130. mice from HGTG by chro57 · · Score: 0

    That's somewhat the feeling. They can take very discreet forms yet be key to the "fate". They demonstrated me the ability to switch bits in the RAM of computers. This is a very fine grained interaction. They probably subtly influence people by touching their neurons. Then you may also say that I exhibit symptoms of schizophrenia and that I am hallucinating by believing in some sort of influencing "god". So be it. It's part of the great plan of the "mice".

  131. Reply: "Ugly bags of mostly water" by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    Pwned.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  132. Actually, that mightn't be so hard! by jlehtira · · Score: 1

    There are some building blocks involved in broadcasting a 2-dimensional moving picture. I'd think sending pictures sequentially one after the other is common sense, so what's left is turning a 2d pic into a 1d signal. It's done one line at a time, from top to bottom, with a repeating marker signal between each line. There will be two repeating marker signals, one between each scanline and one longer signal between two frames. These will be the first regularities anyone will notice. When each line of data is the same lenght in the signal, it's reasonable to assume the picture is rectangular. Bingo! And it's intuitive that the amplitude represents brightness! It's easy to count the number of lines between "vertical refreshes", and the number of "pixels" on each line should be roughly equal - a square is an intuitive special case. Now, there is some trouble involved in figuring out the modulation method, but AM is the simplest and rather intuitive. They can make good guesses about the modulation by the frequency spectrum of our signal. This is assuming they've discovered the importance of Fourier's transform too! :). Sure, once they get the picture rolling, it's important to put things to scale. Maybe broadcast it in real time, so they have the time axis right from the start. Size is harder. They'll know which way is down if the video shows people walking around and dropping things, but they won't know if we are big or small. They can guess based on their own ecology though =). Would be interesting to get such a sample to play around with! What someone said about PAL / NTSC / foo, don't you think it's surprising how much you're actually seeing from a video signal even when your TV's setting is wrong?

    1. Re:Actually, that mightn't be so hard! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      of course it assumes they would see, count and hear like we do.

      If there was anyoine within 45 lightyears that have found a way for 'FTL' travel, we would have seen them by now. Naturally I am assuming that a lifeform that achieved that ALSO was courious enough to go check out nearby stars.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  133. Star Trek by neoviky · · Score: 1

    A much better and simpler option is to beam them Star Trek episodes. I would prefer the original TOS ones, but with the updated visuals of space and spaceships. It would show that we are, well, good and advanced! It's more safer! And maybe in 90 years (when they get those signals), we do have some more of the technology shown in the episodes! Vicki

  134. Actually by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They RIAA probably doesn't even care.

  135. i hope by Intangion · · Score: 1

    i hope the people on it will at least be reasonably fit and attractive ;)
    i mean we really dont want to be broadcasting bloated flabby people's images into space, an alien species will think that we are ripe for farming like cattle

  136. alien porn by BamZyth · · Score: 1

    Let's hope they don't have laws against alien porn.

  137. Sue the Aliens Under DMCA by Coco+Lopez · · Score: 1

    I see a big revenue opportunity here for the people of Earth.

    Once these aliens have found out how to decrypt our signal, we'll sue them for violating the DMCA.

    We'll all be millionaires!

  138. Well by iminplaya · · Score: 1

    This should be quite change from the "I Love Lucy" broadcasts they're receiving now.

    --
    What?
  139. Errai? Really? by Pfhreak · · Score: 1

    I'm a bit surprised that they'd pick Errai, of all stars. It's only three billion years old, which puts it at the same age as the sun at the time that cells with nuclei first appeared: not the best candidate for decoding a radio message. On top of that, one of the two stars is a subgiant, which means its in the process of swelling into a red giant, so it's probably cooking any planets it might have that could support life.

    --
    The U.S. Constitution needs to be ammended with a "separation of business and state" clause.
  140. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by DieNadel · · Score: 1

    I've found your remarks so correctly stated, that I added you as a Friend.

    Keep on informing the uneducated!

    --
    Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
  141. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by DieNadel · · Score: 1

    Oh, you too missed the point. What he's trying to say is that NUDITY may be a bad thing in Middle East for reasons totally different from PORNOGRAPHY (which probably is bad as well, just differently so).

    To be clear, what it's being said here is:
    While NUDITY and/or PORNOGRAPHY may be bad in the Middle East, the US is virtually the only place where simple NUDITY may be considered as PORNOGRAPHY.

    What is not being said:
    That NUDITY, which may be considered as PORNOGRAPHY in the US, is for itself a bad thing.

    The GP just said that Americans tend to sort NUDITY and PORNOGRAPHY in the same bin, while in some other parts of the World people do not share this point of view.

    Got it, or should I draw you a diagram?

    --
    Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
  142. We may have to wait a lot longer than 90 years... by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

    We will have to wait 90 years to learn whether or not some lifeform was listening.

    It could be a lot longer if they decide not to respond. The word quarantine comes to mind.

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
  143. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    While NUDITY and/or PORNOGRAPHY may be bad in the Middle East, the US is virtually the only place where simple NUDITY may be considered as PORNOGRAPHY.

    I feel understood! :-)

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  144. Re:Great, intergalactic pornography by Pedrito · · Score: 1

    I guess it was just one more of these "Maybe we're bad, but we're so much better then teh terrists!!1" posts.

    How did you get that I was saying "we're so much better than the terrorists?" You clearly didn't get what I was saying AT ALL. I was equating the idea that nakedness = pornography with societies that are influenced too heavily by religious fundamentalism. That includes the U.S. If you think the religious right in this country (our president is among their number) isn't fundamentalist, then you don't know what fundamentalists are. Frankly, they're no better than the terrorists. They're equally intolerant and equally ignorant.