Slashdot Mirror


Existing Laser Technology Could Be Fashioned Into Earth's 'Porch Light' To Attract Alien Astronomers, Study Finds (mit.edu)

If extraterrestrial intelligence exists somewhere in our galaxy, a new MIT study proposes that laser technology on Earth could, in principle, be fashioned into something of a planetary porch light -- a beacon strong enough to attract attention from as far as 20,000 light years away. From a report: The research, which author James Clark calls a "feasibility study," appears today in The Astrophysical Journal. The findings suggest that if a high-powered 1- to 2-megawatt laser were focused through a massive 30- to 45-meter telescope and aimed out into space, the combination would produce a beam of infrared radiation strong enough to stand out from the sun's energy. Such a signal could be detectable by alien astronomers performing a cursory survey of our section of the Milky Way -- especially if those astronomers live in nearby systems, such as around Proxima Centauri, the nearest star to Earth, or TRAPPIST-1, a star about 40 light-years away that hosts seven exoplanets, three of which are potentially habitable. If the signal is spotted from either of these nearby systems, the study finds, the same megawatt laser could be used to send a brief message in the form of pulses similar to Morse code.

257 comments

  1. Is it a good idea? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Imagine some primitive stone age tribe living in some island in the Pacific. Never knew if they were alone on the Earth or some other humans existed elsewhere. Some Chief gets the bright idea to send smoke signals so that if there are people somewhere in the ocean they will know there are people on this island.

    Any tribe that had such an idea in the 15th and 16th century would have been run over and destroyed before they even know what was happening.

    Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How were we brutal? If anything, the savages were the brutal ones. Although I agree with the basic idea to not attract attention and to not mess with the homes of savages.

    2. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was going to say exactly this but this was worded better. Well done.

      Yeah, I can imagine a news headline in a few hundred years from now after half the world is ravaged and destroyed saying we shouldn't have sent out the light signal.

    3. Re:Is it a good idea? by NEDHead · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Seriously? You really should study a little history

    4. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of porch light, can we call it a heat lamp? Make Earth a little more attractive to passing alien species. Like, "hey, there are plenty of delicious humans to eat, just come here!"

    5. Re:Is it a good idea? by Kulahan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It wouldn't even be that close. It would be like if we had another 500 years to develop our military technology, and these were people who had never even seen electricity harnessed before. We show up with fucking mech walkers and sniper rifles with 2 mile ranges and fighter jets that are naked to the human eye and they're throwing rocks and sticks at us.

      Any alien that can come say hello would be so far out of our league we'd be like ants to them - barely smarter than the monkeys and dogs and kangaroos around us as far as they're concerned.

    6. Re:Is it a good idea? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You could argue that in order to have the technology to travel to another star they would have to have achieved a certain level of civilisation and understanding of the risks, if not the moral implications.

      On the other hand they may decide that the safest thing is to hurl a big rock our way.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Is it a good idea? by Kulahan · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well I didn't have my coffee. I meant fighter jets that are *invisible* to the *naked* eye.

      Though jets with giant dongs would be similarly terrifying I suppose.

    8. Re:Is it a good idea? by losfromla · · Score: 1

      You're still brutal. Brutally ignorant.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    9. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because we have been invaded a long time by the worst aliens in the universe (archons) and they do not have our well being in mind, a look at the world today can confirm this. And this negative aliens have planted in us fear and unwillingness to believe that something better is out there. We just need to wake up and do something about it.

    10. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Humans are brutal in general, regardless of tribal identity or history. There's this weird recent idea that western=bad, primitive-people=good, and it's just as idiotic as the reverse that people used to believe. The Noble Savage and all that shit like you might see in Dances With Wolves. It's all a lot of malarky. It's hippie nonsense stemming from the belief that modern society is corrupt, and somehow living in caves was some wonderful, freeing thing where it was some great society.

      Why does either extreme not understand human nature? Go read Lord Of The Flies. That's what humans are actually like.

    11. Re:Is it a good idea? by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't imagine they'd have been run over or destroyed. There's 3 logical results 1. Nobody cares.. Group see's the unknown, determines it as not a threat or benefit, doesn't bother to get past signal range. 2. They care for benevolent reasons. Maybe wish to trade recipes or ask what's going on on that rock... more advanced society may or may not be able to find a use for unique plants or animals to that island/planet that don't disrupt the natural order too much. 3. Malovent reasons: Outright destroying isn't likely to be the case in most societies, It costs money, time etc... to wage a fight, even when you have all the advantages, but it is meaningless if you have nothing to gain... So possible things to gain are, geological or biological resources Slave labor would have made sense in the 15th-16th century, not so much to a society technologically advanced enough for interplanetary travel. Really they wouldn't likely bother with the humans unless something easier to obtain on earth were hard to obtain in most easilly accessible planets.

    12. Re:Is it a good idea? by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 2

      That's my thoughts. Great idea - turn on your porch light to let people know you exist. The problem is that we might be living in a bad neighborhood, cosmically speaking.

      There might be things on the lookout for a nice habitable planet. Not what we want to attract.

    13. Re:Is it a good idea? by GoTeam · · Score: 2

      I'd be more worried that the intergalactic FAA will be pissed that we're shooting lasers throughout the galaxy. What if one of those laser beams were to hit a space pilot in the eye? Who would pay the fine? What kind of payment would they accept? We clearly have not thought this through yet.

    14. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can we shape the beam such that it appears to be 2 side-by-side arches?

    15. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've seriously never heard of the "Noble Savage" concept? Because it's a concept that criticizes the sort of thing you're upset about. I think you've misunderstood the comment you're replying to.

    16. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact that you insist on referring to non-Western Europeans as "savages" strongly indicates that you're a dickhead.

      You misunderstood AC above. Go look up the history of the term "Noble Savage". He was calling the concept bullshit. It is the people with opinions he opposes that came up with that term. Please do some reading on the subject.

    17. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would assume any alien civilization who could detect and then make it to earth would have evolved to the point where resources and energy and technology would no longer be a hurdle to survival.

      Right now the human population are just a bunch of voracious super predator stuck on a floating island in space.

      So I think we would initially look at any Alien civilization as competition to our resources, while they would probably look at us as midly intelligent animals to add into their zoo collection.

    18. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit you can't be serious.

      Look at some of the shit France did in Vietnam during the colonial period. No wonder they fought for their independence and reunification for like 40 years until it happened.

    19. Re:Is it a good idea? by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      This is the kind of post that I'd love to mod as "informative"

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    20. Re:Is it a good idea? by gumpish · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have a hard time imagining the mindset of someone who thinks interstellar civilizations will be like Vikings, but with space ships.

    21. Re:Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Look at the shit the Aztec and Mayan did to their own people before plagues got them. The only difference is that as society progresses people are generally less shitty toward one another (not that it matters, everyone knows the exact same level of pleasure and pain: all they know - in turn people will bitch about non-issues until they're blue in the face: see modern political issues.)

    22. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It used to be the dream of alchemists to transmute lead (or other elements) into gold. Their lack of scientific understanding made it effectively impossible for them to ever succeed. Today, elements are transmuted every day in the core of nuclear reactors. But in gaining the scientific and engineering mastery of nuclear processes, the dream of the alchemists became antiquated and irrelevant. Put another way, the scientific knowledge that we gained is far more valuable than transmuted gold.

      Similarly, aliens who have mastered interstellar space travel would have little interest in plundering our tiny little world or wiping out a harmless, planet-locked species. It is a long way to come with no real benefit to them.

    23. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lunatics are so cute.

    24. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > something easier to obtain on earth

      like liquid water

    25. Re:Is it a good idea? by gtall · · Score: 1

      Earth laser Smoke Signals the nearest star, Alpha Centauri.

      8.6 years later, Earth receives Alpha Centauri smoke signal.

      Earth telegraphs: Hi

      8.6 years later, Alpha Centauri telegraphs: Hi

      Earth sends: We are people of Earth, we bid you welcome.

      8.6 years later, Alpha Centauri sends: Go away, yer too bloody boring, and stop wasting our time. You won't be on our white list from now on.

    26. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely not a winning strategy for

    27. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definitely wasn't a winning strategy for Atahualpa. He welcomed the Spanish conquistador leader Pizarro because their ancestors predicted they would be sought out by light skinned Gods with beards. Pizarro plundered the Inca temples for Gold. Eventually had Atahualpa garroted in spite of a generous over of rooms of Gold by the Inca. Not a good idea.

    28. Re:Is it a good idea? by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 2

      Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

      If there were an alien race so advanced as to be able to travel huge distances to the tune of thousands of light years then they wouldn't care less about the Earth because with their abilities they could travel to and harvest any other much closer planets which we've found aplenty. You just cannot even fathom such an advanced civilization.

      In fact a lot of scientists think that we're not alone in the universe but other civilizations are either too far away from us, or they visited us briefly in the past, found pretty stupid dinosaurs and left, or they've been watching us all along but they just don't believe we're intelligent enough to deal with them as they are practically Gods and we're practically ants for them. How often do you stop to talk to ants? Do you even treat ants as intelligent? That's what we might be for intergalactic spacefaring civilizations.

      Also, just also, I would love Earth to be conquered by hostile aliens as we are currently doing everything to go extinct and take Earth with us. Maybe, just maybe we deserve some culling and really intelligent governance. Also, this civilization will most likely bring a ton of knowledge, immortality, genome editing, nano tech, a cure for all diseases, AGI, unlimited fusion and fission, the knowledge of this universe (why it's here at all) and many things which look unattainable for us at the moment.

    29. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are they anything like thetans?

    30. Re:Is it a good idea? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

      Because explorers were brutal for profit. Given the physical limits of our universe (like the speed of light in a vacuum), there's no conceivable profit motive for crossing interstellar distances to exploit Earth out of all planets.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    31. Re:Is it a good idea? by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, a lot of the reason the focus is on "western=bad" is that the westerners generally had the greater power. People are more interested in condemning Hitler than in condemning a terminally ill homeless amputee with the same views and goals as Hitler.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    32. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you seriously just both sides the European conquest of the Americas? Wow.

    33. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See, the thing about liquid water, is that you can get it by heating frozen water. It turns out that, being composed of two of the three most common chemical elements in the universe, which are also highly chemically reactive, thereâ(TM)s a lot of water out there. And itâ(TM)s not hard to melt if you have available energy. Which an interstellar civilization would need to have. Also, most of the ice is not quite so deep in a gravity well.

      Honestly, if we have one resource that aliens might want to take, it will probably be real estate. Maybe thatâ(TM)s what you actually meant: real estate with liquid water. It does seem possible that aliens might displace us so their real estate developers can sell their people homes with big yards for their kids to run (crawl? Hop? Fly? Ooze?) around in. They wouldnâ(TM)t really need to take it by force either. They could actually be friendly and benevolent but simply have so much economic power that we canâ(TM)t compete.

    34. Re:Is it a good idea? by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      More likely, they won't even notice. (I hope, personally, for the same reasons you posted).

      I'd made a longer blog post about this, but basically, if we say the universe is 15b years old, and our solar system took about 5b years to get here where we are, and lets even assume that the first 5b years of the universe it was a unique period with nothing productive happening.

      This would mean that it's possible there were civilizations where we are today, about 5b years ago.

      Assuming it's going to be a relatively trivial 1000 years or so before we're all up in the stars, doing stuff, that means that such a civilization on the same timescale would have a 5b year head start.

      Assuming they were only 1b years more advanced, that's the evolutionary distance between humans and the first multicellular life. Is there ANY signal an amoeba could send that would attract human attention? And what would our response be if we suddenly found some bacteria were trying to talk to us?

      No, I can't imagine it would end well for the bacteria.

      (This is also why I think the sci-fi canon of alien space empires slugging it out in space battleships is nonsensical; the odds that 2 such civilizations happened to evolve within a 'sporting' tech difference of say only a few hundred years is ludicrously small. The only way this happens is if a single race goes to space, and then fractures against itself.)

      --
      -Styopa
    35. Re: Is it a good idea? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Look at some of the shit France did in Vietnam during the colonial period. No wonder they fought for their independence and reunification for like 40 years until it happened.

      That's a cute way of putting it. Meanwhile, in reality, the war in Vietnames starting with the French involvement was very much a civil war quite similar to the one in Korea. Communists in the north vs a democratic republic in the south, with Russia and China supporting their commie brothers while France (and, later, America) tried to prop up the democraric south.

      Sure, the French did some horrible things. So did the Americans. Any brutality displayed by either of those participants pales in comparison to what the Vietnamese did to them, and to each other.

    36. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      How were we brutal? If anything, the savages were the brutal ones. Although I agree with the basic idea to not attract attention and to not mess with the homes of savages.

      It's shit like this that makes me question our educational system...

      Show me any "savages" that had anything even resembling the vast array of torture devices that had been invented, by Europeans, by the time those Europeans began exploring the world (15th - 18th centuries) and interacting with less technologically developed humans.

      We came up with devices designed to absolutely maximize the pain that was inflicted during executions and torture. I'm not implying the natives were peaceful or did not engage in bloody wars but, for fuck's sake, they did not devote the man-hours that we did to the creation of devices meant to enhance, intensify, and prolong the misery of dying.

    37. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The fact that you insist on referring to non-Western Europeans as "savages" strongly indicates that you're a dickhead.

      That's what they were referred to as, at the time. Better get back inside before you melt, snowflake.

    38. Re: Is it a good idea? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      How often do you stop to talk to ants? Do you even treat ants as intelligent? That's what we might be for intergalactic spacefaring civilizations.

      If an ant shone a fucking laser beam in my eye, yeah, I'd stop and have a chat with him ...

    39. Re:Is it a good idea? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

      Let alone modern or old age Muslims.

      Or Indians / jungle tribes. Or Japanese people.

      You're welcome.

    40. Re:Is it a good idea? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      ... of course Mongols, Moroccans and so on too ..

    41. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Humans are brutal in general, regardless of tribal identity or history.

      And like everything, there are degrees. Europeans invented some of the most fucked-up torture devices ever constructed. Yeah, it's the past and I'm not condemning any living European for this bit of history (they weren't there). But to even imply that there aren't LEVELS of brutality is bullshit.

      Our technology has given us the ability to kill more efficiently, torture more effectively, and destroy more completely. In the 20th century, Europeans were responsible for... perhaps 95 out of every 100 deaths by war, worldwide? Our ability to exceed our previous achievements in the craft of death/torture is.. impressive.

    42. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      The only difference is that as society progresses people are generally less shitty toward one another...

      No..... just.. no..

      History absolutely contradicts this.

      History shows that as our society progresses we get even better at killing and we tend to be a whole lot more brutal about it.

      Think about it.. The next war.. the one we've been trying like hell to avoid since the end of WWII... the nuclear war.. Well, it might fucking kill all of us.. That's .. well, that's 100% efficiency..

      We just keep getting better and better and better at killing our fellow humans. I'm no bleeding-heart and I do think some wars are absolutely justified, sometimes.. But goddamn... they are getting costly in terms of lives..

    43. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dark Forest

    44. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Turns out the question is completely irrelevant. Any aliens sufficiently advanced that they could physically visit us already know we're here. We are now at the cusp of being able to detect industrial civilizations on planets around nearby stars by examining their atmospheric composition, but we're centuries away from being able to travel interstellar distances let alone sending an invasion force. By the time we have manned interstellar spacecraft, we will have detailed maps of nearby exoplanets and knowledge of any alien civilization within hundreds of light years.

      Signaling to potential alien civilizations with lasers would only let them know that we're interested in talking to them. Communication by itself could of course cause significant cultural change, but the scenario is totally different from apes on boats taking over an island inhabited by apes with smaller boats. For starters, assuming there is a star-faring alien civilization, that capability alone would mean we have no resources for them to exploit that they couldn't find an easier supply for (e.g. by mining asteroids).

    45. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh no. You should. Stop reading your socialist claptrap.

    46. Re:Is it a good idea? by nickersonm · · Score: 1

      In the 20th century, Europeans were responsible for... perhaps 95 out of every 100 deaths by war, worldwide? Our ability to exceed our previous achievements in the craft of death/torture is.. impressive.

      You forget the Sino-Japanese portion of WWII, a significant fraction. If you got back before the 20th century, China tends to top the lists as well. I imagine much of that is simply population.

    47. Re:Is it a good idea? by HanzoSpam · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing this bright idea was dreamed up by a bunch of enlightened progressive scientists who, of course, assume that any aliens who are intelligent enough to develop space travel must, of course, be enlightened progressive, too.

      It's not clear which is more galling about these people. Their arrogance or their stupidity.

      --

      Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
    48. Re: Is it a good idea? by e3m4n · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was literally the last warning from Steven Hawkings. History is full of examples of what happens when one civilization meets another civilization that is vastly ahead in technology. It has always ended badly for the ones with inferior technology.

      https://www.sciencealert.com/s...

    49. Re:Is it a good idea? by Wraithlyn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He is not calling non-westerns "Savages". He is referring to the LITERARY TROPE of the Noble Savage (and calling it stupid): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      Try a little harder to be offended?

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    50. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Noble Savage" is a known trope.

      He's mocking it, you imbecile.

    51. Re:Is it a good idea? by k2r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > So why is AC still using the term "savages" to refer to non
      > Western European cultures, and why the fuck are you defending the practice?

      And why the fuck don’t you at least TRY to educate yourself on the term “Noble Savage” and it’s contemporary usage which is exactly criticizing the pseudo-positive racism, colonialism and paternalism that is inherent in the combination of those words.

      Bah, all hope is lost if even people on your side of the trench can’t be bothered to think.

    52. Re:Is it a good idea? by skam240 · · Score: 0

      How about imagining every time in human history a more advanced society came across a more primitive one?

      Sure, let's send out a beacon and then hope that if another species that managed to survive the rigors of evolution and is able to come respond to it is some how not as violent as we are.

      Yeah, right...

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    53. Re:Is it a good idea? by k2r · · Score: 1

      They may just not have been technically advanced enough to have enough spare time to come up with those ideas.
      You need a proper, stable food supply to afford people whose only job is to invent means of torture.

    54. Re:Is it a good idea? by k2r · · Score: 0

      From a psychological perspective fighter jets ARE giant dongs...

      (And there’s something to say about military parades and small hands...)

    55. Re: Is it a good idea? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      the war in Vietnames starting with the French involvement was very much a civil war quite similar to the one in Korea. Communists in the north vs a democratic republic in the south, with Russia and China supporting their commie brothers while France (and, later, America) tried to prop up the democraric south.

      The French were in Vietnam before Marx was even born. They did not go in to prop up any form of democratic government; they were already there running the place through a puppet monarchy.

      Do you think history only began in 1955?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    56. Re:Is it a good idea? by k2r · · Score: 1

      3b) Disinfection - before the earthlings build von Neumann probes and become a nuisance to clean up.

    57. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the Noble Savage doesn't even exist, it's a philosophical concept. It refers to a man living in complete wilderness, not exposed to human society and presumed in a blank state and thus not corrupted by e.g. power politics, religion or money.
      So, it says "savage"? Well, that's still the French word for "wild" i.e. animal sauvage, wild animal. Even English language dictionaries seem to agree so the adjective may refer to an untamed animal or the noun to a man in a primitive society (merriam-webster). There is no moral judgement in that and in fact if you get dismembered by a bear or mauled by a lion, we will exonerate the bear or lion and even blame you for messing with the beast and having put stress on it.

      I also question the utility of coming to the defense of someone who is undefined, fictional and lived centuries ago.
      Are we forbidden to call a black person a black, and a dwarf a dwarf? Is it sexist to say "woman"? This never ends.

    58. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

      Because of the energy and resources required to cross interstellar space.

      Imagine we picked up a signal from another solar system that indicated intelligent life existed there.

      The human race has a history of brutality and inclination toward conquest, but doing that requires an organized effort. People have to come together and expend the resources and effort to make the voyage.

      So what would be our incentive to conquer aliens that would bring everyone together?

      Resources? Even then, if we develop the technology to get to another solar system, we have the technology to mine the asteroid belts in our own solar system far more cheaply.

      Slaves? If we're going to throw our morals away, humans are better suited to this planet and we can breed them cheaply and we understand their psychology well enough to manipulate them.

      Technology? If they have better technology than we do, our conquerors are sitting at the end of a multi-year-long supply line while the aliens have all the reinforcements they need right there. Biology weapons you say? Why would you think anything we have would work on the aliens? It's far more likely our people would be the ones getting sick and dying from being in an alien environment.

      Basically, there is no motivation. The whole "our planet is dead, so we're taking yours" assumes that

      The simple fact is that any aliens who show up will just be curious. If they wipe out the human race, it will probably be due to them accidentally giving us access to weapons of mass destruction

    59. Re:Is it a good idea? by ThomasD3 · · Score: 1

      someone mod this up!

    60. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuclear weapons only kill everyone in a 5km or so radius. People might survive even if the kill zone if sheltered by concrete building, and if you have warning the survival measure is to fill your sinks and bottles and pans etc. with tap water then spend like a week (or couple days) with all your windows and doors shut off to wait for the worst radiation to come down.

      So, there are billions of immediate survivors and perhaps what comes next is worse than the bombings.. but we won't be all killed off, yet.

    61. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If some civilization is less than 20.000 light years away and has not been here yet, they probably *can't* come here or are so close to us technologically that, getting here 20.000 years latter, their "troops" would already be behind us on arrival (assuming they can only communicate at light speed).

    62. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The executions and torture were for the show, sort of.
      Even privately done torture may have "accomplices" of the guy who is put to the "question" watching, so the more showy the more they're scared shitless..
      See every horror movie or mafia movie where a bad guy calmly unwraps his couple dozen surgical and pseudo-surgical instruments.
      That's the best I could say in defense of old school torture.

      Have nothing? There's a lot that can be done. Something silly simple like kneeling torture or raping with a broom stick or doing something with a sharp edge.I'll just not go further.

    63. Re:Is it a good idea? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 0

      No, not Vikings. Vikings took bath regularly. More like medieval Anglo Saxon savages who thought taking a bath or cleaning them would make them lose their strength in battle. 500 years before the development of the Germ Theory of Disease they had stumbled on to the secret of biological warfare.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    64. Re:Is it a good idea? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      The setting was an isolated island in the Pacific in the 15th and 16th century. Among the vast selection of brutal savages with technology, the one that is likely to see the smoke signal would be some like Vasco da Gama.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    65. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      95% of all war deaths in the 20th century?
      Not even close.

      WW1 had about 15 million dead.
      WW2 had about 70 million dead, of which 25 million were Chinese/Japanese.
      So, after the two BIG European conflicts, you're left with about 60 million to 25 million - already your "95%" is blown away.

      Then toss in those conflicts like the 2nd Congo Civil War (4 million dead), the Bangladesh Rebellion (3.0-3.5 million dead), the Nigerian Civil War (2.5 million dead), the 2nd Sudanese Civil War (2+ million dead), and end with the Ethiopian Civil War, the Iran-Iraq War, or the Angolan Civil War at 1 million dead each. We're already as worse than 60-40 here. And I'm no where close to counting all the sub-million "forgotten" conflicts that the 20th century was chock-full of.
      Stuff like Somalia, DRC, Mali, Sudan's first and third civil wars, Yemen, Myanmar, Lebanon, the Moro, the Kurds, Sri Lanka, Chinese invasions of Vietnam and Burma, the Colombian revolutionaries (and who can forget Che!), the Soviet-funded Communist revolutionaries all over Africa and SE Asia, etc, etc.

      It's a lot closer to 50/50 than you would think -and that's only counting the *major* conflicts that get recorded in history books. Stuff like the Rwandan genocide doesn't count, the day-to-day murders of Boko Haram don't count, the ethnic fighting in rural Indonesia doesn't count...

    66. Re: Is it a good idea? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Well if you want to go that far back, you'll have to be more specific about which bits of history you're referring to. French militray assistance to varuous Viatnamese royals in the late 18th/early 19th century? The French kicking the Chinese out of Northern Vietnam? The Vietnamese royalty requesting that Vietnam be a French protectorate? The Cambodians requesting the same thing? The Japanese conquest of French Indochina? The defeat of the Japanese and reestablishment of French control?

      Are you under some strange delusion that the region was some kind of pacifist paradise with the French just stomping around randomly and killing people for no reason? If so, you certainly have no business lecturing anyone else about history.

    67. Re:Is it a good idea? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      It isn't just "savages", but any defeated society takes on a connotation of nobility, fierce, great fighters, and so on. In spite of the generally positive nature of the beliefs, it is a kind of reverse racism.

      Crimean Warriors, anyone?

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    68. Re:Is it a good idea? by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      You could argue that in order to have the technology to travel to another star they would have to have achieved a certain level of civilisation and understanding of the risks, if not the moral implications.

      Yes, but you you can't guarantee that.

    69. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those torture devices, they were one part of a cultural and technological collective that was capable of survival at a certain level. That society had a specific level of interpersonal cooperation, and that level of cooperation allowed it to produce food, boats, etc., and to explore other shores and maintain a governmental presence over a certain distance.

      However, that unique combination could never, in any world, reach the moon. The level of interpersonal cooperation necessary to do the kind of scientific experimentation necessary to even have the means, let alone the economic strength necessary to engineer a rocket capable of making the journey, is fundamentally higher than what you can get from a culture that utilizes torture as a common means of punishment.

      Between then and now, there has been a mutually-supporting upward march of scientific knowledge and moral enlightenment. Slaves are no longer kept in western society precisely because our technologies of labor are such that we no longer rely on slavery to survive. The moral rejection of slavery arose as soon as it was technologically possible, and that rejection founded a labor market of unprecedented freedom and open competition, which in turn produced an economy of greater strength and wealth than ever before. Only in THAT economy was it even possible to build large hadron colliders, cell phones, and so on.

      So what's my point? If WE encountered alien life that was obviously intelligent, but technologically inferior to our own....we would NOT instantly enslave it. Our own people would demand that we respect the rights the natives have to their planet and to their soveriginity. Our own citizens would demand that their government NOT BRUTALIZE the primitive aliens. And the reason we would do this is because WE are culturally enlightened enough to know that this is the right thing to do. And that cultural enlightenment is a necessary component of the scientific and economic means we have that allowed us to discover the aliens.

      That works in reverse. Any space faring species that discovers us must, by logical necessity, be part of a society that is morally enlightened enough to cooperate well enough to have those technologies. THEY would have the same (or better) values that we do, and they would respect our sovereignty for that very reason.

    70. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The human race has aggression, competitiveness, and violence coded in it's DNA. Traits that were necessary to become the planets top APEX species. There has never been a time in documented history were there wasn't a least one war raging some where on the planet. We have been fighting one another since the first person clubbed another in the head with a rock to get a bigger cave and a better woman.

    71. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      You think that the radiation will die down in a week? That's not consistent with the half-life of plutonium or uranium. If nuclear war happens there will be a lot of radiation. The vast majority of humanity will likely be targeted. Then you have residual effects where most if not all ecosystems are wrecked. If people are prepared with shelters they could survive for a few years but after that it is doubtful that the human species would live on.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    72. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      We only even have enough nukes to wipe out half the population because most people live in cities. There aren't anywhere near enough on the whole Earth combined to wipe people out (hell, long-term it would probably be a win for the planet and our species to pop them all off at once.)

    73. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Sure, back when Euro-centric white supremecists ran the world. But that's not the world we live in anymore, and at this point in history we are well aware that the "savage races" weren't actually all that savage, and in fact many of them were highly advanced for their time.

      So why is AC still using the term "savages" to refer to non-Western European cultures, and why the fuck are you defending the practice?

      Listen snowflake, your virtue signaling isn't impressing anyone besides other snowflakes. You have NO MORAL AUTHORITY to be outraged on behalf of anyone else. In this case your triggering is doubly stupid. The OP wasn't actually calling them savages as a type of slur. You'd know this, but that requires a level of reading comprehension and familiarity with history that you are, apparently, lacking. If anything the "savages" was said tongue-in-cheek. Do you know what that means or do I have to spoon-feed you the definition?

      Let's move on to the fact that, grammatically speaking, savage is the correct term. You do not get to redefine what it actually means. It is the CORRECT FUCKING WORD.

      SAVAGE
      adj. Not domesticated or cultivated; wild: savage beasts of the jungle.
      adj. Not civilized; barbaric: a people living in a savage state.
      adj. Ferocious; fierce: in a savage temper.

      See that second definition? Notice how it actually loops back to the first definition? Kinda odd how absolutely none of those definitions is a slur, yeah?

      A people living in a savage state.. And what is savage? Oh, it's not domesticated or cultivated. You could easily replace the word cultivated with civilized. People who live in the jungles are SAVAGES. The fact that you choose to interpret this as a slur is your failing. The fact others chose to use it as a slur is their failing. But the word means what it means. It's neutral. And it is correct.

      Now, on behalf of nobody besides myself, kindly take a bottle of KY & two fingers and cram your Politically Correct, Holier-than-Thou bullshit up your ass.

    74. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Nevertheless it still contradicts the statement. We had the technology and leisure time to be brutal. I'll accept that.. But it was us that was brutal. I'm not arguing they didn't have the inclination to be brutal, but they certainly didn't have the means. Not on the level we did.

    75. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I'm sure population is a very large factor.. But jeeze... a lot of people were killed during the 20th century.. Let's just say that Europeans/People of European descent were the majority. I'm not making a judgement.. I'm just saying... We have gotten really good at killing. I suspect we'll get even better in the years to come.. It's sad..

    76. Re:Is it a good idea? by magzteel · · Score: 1

      Humans are brutal in general, regardless of tribal identity or history.

      And like everything, there are degrees. Europeans invented some of the most fucked-up torture devices ever constructed. Yeah, it's the past and I'm not condemning any living European for this bit of history (they weren't there). But to even imply that there aren't LEVELS of brutality is bullshit.

      Our technology has given us the ability to kill more efficiently, torture more effectively, and destroy more completely. In the 20th century, Europeans were responsible for... perhaps 95 out of every 100 deaths by war, worldwide? Our ability to exceed our previous achievements in the craft of death/torture is.. impressive.

      Don't give the Europeans so much credit. Sadistic ritual torture where the victim was tortured to death in the most gruesome ways imaginable was invented by the native American and African tribes long before the Europeans culturally appropriated it. Only through Eurocentric revisionist history can you give the Europeans the credit for inventing it. The Europeans may have made some devices of their own, but they were standing on the shoulders of giants.

    77. Re:Is it a good idea? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Geebus, stop thinking of Aliens as some kind of blob. Think more, this generation of Aliens, those Aliens alive today. So why the fuck would a society evolve all at once, we haven't, huge difference in social development across the world, as for other far more evolved societies, probably maintain primitive worlds for their less evolved counter parts. Straight up logic theory, unless you alter your conflict resolving basis as you technology evolves, so you will cause yourself to go extinct, simply inevitable ie for us, get rid of our psychopaths or allow them to send us extinct, they have caused many societies to go extinct, a global society means the extinction of humanity under the insane rule of it's psychopaths. As for us, so that logical genetic thought structure patterns occur for others upon similar evolutionary demands.

      Looking for them with our technology kind of stupid, unless you are trying to catch them out in local space. Doesn't matter how long we have been looking for them with our technology, what really counts is how long they have been looking for us with their technology. Claiming they would not look is juvenile and stupid, how could they resist making a countless broadcast shows of the trials and tribulations of the mud monkeys (earth primates), how could not our ravaging each other be the greatest form of entertainment in the galaxy. Lie to yourself as much as you want, you know how irresistible that would be, how it would be craved in a stable and boring galaxy.

      What would we see, obviously depends upon how rare it is. Billions of years in evolution, right up to the moment of transformation, from primitive to modern, the transformation moment, which we still have not completed in galactic terms. So tens of thousands of years against billions of years of planetary evolution and the main cause, the somewhat recent cyclic ice ages which favoured brain development and adaptability over physical development. So yeah, really fucking rare and over billions of star system sort of occurring around once in a million years, so as rare as you can image, tens of thousands of generations of Aliens have gone by without watching the birth of a new galactic species. The recent few generations have gotten to watch, to anthropomorphise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... and nothing less but their own evolution in the distant past, to in essence feel what their distant ancestors felt, really fucking distant.

      Now comes the fun part, how protective of that would they be, easy, once in a million years protective. Ain't nothing getting through what they do not want to get through, no rocks, no suns, no starship, nothing to spoil their moment of reliving their history and watching the spectacle and you know they would watch every single fucking thing they can, every action and even every thought, they would not want to miss a single thing. All secret to not spoil the development to watch the show, until that one final fateful day, the welcome to the galaxy party day, well the first day of what I am sure would be a very interesting month or so.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    78. Re:Is it a good idea? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      Our educational system has done a good job teaching our own people that Western culture is the worst that the world has ever produced. It's not. Go and check the actual figures for the 20th Century. Most are by China (PRC), Russia, Japan, China (KMT), Cambodia, and other non-Western cultures. Who remembers the Indonesian genocide? The Pakistani genocide of 1971? Nobody, because it doesn't serve the political purpose of convincing people that the West is the worst.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    79. Re:Is it a good idea? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Really? They were advanced? What was their position on women's rights? Did they allow women to vote? Did they invade other countries and overthrow their governments so systems could be set up so women could vote? Did they open their borders and welcome strangers speaking incomprehensible languages and practicing backwards cultures? Did they create manufacturing techniques that reduced the price of goods so low that it lifted billions of people out of squalor? If not, then they're not as advanced as us. It's OK to look down on inferior cultures - and if you disagree with that statement then visit any trailer park in America and then come back and tell us about savages.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    80. Re:Is it a good idea? by Boronx · · Score: 1

      The Lord of the flies is novel and doesn't do human nature justice. Your the only one that brought of the concept of a noble savage. Heck, the island civilization was hypothetical. Nobody characterized it as anything other than ignorant about the world around it.

      Hey, have an informative mod for responding to a point nobody made and using fiction as your argument.

    81. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 0

      You misunderstand... I'm alluding to the sheer variety. Nobody else has had the time or technology to devise the vast numbers and variations of torture devices that we have. This isn't about race or culture. It's a matter of fact. I'm not saying Europeans did it because they were Europeans, goddamnit. I'm saying Europeans did it because it was Europeans that did it.

      Africans didn't invent Iron Maidens, Pears of Agony, drawing and quartering, or a host of other inventions. It's not because they didn't have the mind to invent it, it's because they didn't have the technology. We had the technology and we used it.

      History, as per the OP is exactly what is at play here. Besides, to even suppose that Africans might have invented it is a supposition. We don't know if they would have and we don't know that they wouldn't have. But what we do know, in fact all that we know, is that Europeans took the technological advances they were presented with and used them to devise some FUCKED up tools.

      Why is it that everything has to be broken down to the level of a 5 year old for you leftist fuckers? Why do you see cultural appropriation and identity politics wherever you look?

      In fact, I'm gonna really disagree with you on a fundamental level.. Europeans didn't appropriate anything. Torture devices have been with us for a long fucking time. The Europeans would have had that knowledge from before the races diverged. They happened to settle in an area that ended up being ideal for the development of science and technology.. Less work to grow food, more time for improving (versus inventing) steel rods to go up your asshole..

      Hell, even if we weren't torturing each other before we all migrated out of Africa and spread to the 4 corners of the world, it's absolutely plausible that torture devices would have been invented, independently, by the various groups even if they had absolutely zero contact with each other. Humans share an awful lot of traits across racial/ethnic/geographic boundaries.. One of these traits seems to be the desire to kill people you dislike in as painful a way as possible.

      Geography gave the Europeans the ability to develop the technology to take that to some fucked up new levels.. Not because they are Europeans.. Not because of their race... Not because they're white.. It's just because that's how it worked out...

      Like talking to a goddamn wall...

    82. Re:Is it a good idea? by religionofpeas · · Score: 1

      I have a hard time imagining the mindset of someone who thinks interstellar civilizations will be like Vikings, but with space ships.

      Do you also have a hard time imaging the mindset of Vikings ?

    83. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Check your facts. I think you've taken a lot of BS at face value.

      First: "Africans"? Which Africans? At what time period? "Europeans"? Same questions. They're big continents that have been home to a wide variety of cultures. You want to point at the Kingdom of Dahomey, during the slave trade, or Spain, during the Inquisition, sure, they were objectively evil, by modern standards.

      Second: Truly, check your facts. The Iron Maiden was invented from whole cloth by hacks seeking to profit off of the lurid imaginations of the credulous. There is absolutely no evidence it was put to any use, except as a glorified haunted house prop. The entire concept of the thing reeks of someone who doesn't know the first thing about human biology.

      Drawing and quartering wasn't confined to Europe, nor death by insect to the New World. We are, all of us, savage, cruel, and sadistically inventive apes. The minute god shat out a third cave-man, a conspiracy was hatched against one of them.

      You seem to be blessedly ignorant of the myriad ways that different cultures have inflicted pain on those they felt deserved it. This is not a bad thing. I know of things that I would really be happier not knowing, but they're the kind of things that stick with you. Curiosity can lead you to horrible truths.

    84. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not at all, they seem pretty cool besides the violent stuff.

    85. Re:Is it a good idea? by terrycarlino · · Score: 1

      This is just fantasy. The most advanced rockets in the first half of the 20th century were developed by the Nazis. The USSR, not exactly known for its advanced personal cooperation, nor free of torture devices, was the first country to put both a satellite in orbit and a human in orbit. Only a massive effort by the U.S. with cooperation from a handful of other countries allowed them to reach the moon first.

      Intellectual capacity has absolutely nothing to do with moral orientation. Slavery is not used in western society purely because Christianity made a stand against it and after nearly a century of work managed to get it legally banned. Look up William Wilberforce if you don't believe me. In the U.S. it took a bloody 5 year war and almost a century to begin to blow away the vestiges of it. By the way many of those vestiges, like segregation, including Alabama style segregation, still existed when the U.S. reached the moon.

      So no. It doesn't require that a technologically advanced civilization be morally advanced.

    86. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I have a hard time imagining the mindset of someone who thinks interstellar civilizations will be like Vikings, but with space ships.

      Space Vikings would be a blessing. You can reason with a Viking. He's interested in your women, your gold, and your lands. Maybe you can make a deal with him, some shiny tokens to go on somewhere else and leave you undisturbed.

      Space is an empty place, desolate and quiet. If there's something out there, it wants it to be that way, because otherwise they would make it different than it is.

      Disrupt the order of space with chaotic signs of intelligence, and you will find that whatever force, sentient entity, or statistical tendency has rendered space into what it is now, will do the same to you. The silence of space should be perceived for what it is: a natural law.

      "The number of visible and interesting disruptions to space tend towards zero over time. By force if necessary."

    87. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair, a lot of the reason the focus is on "western=bad" is that the westerners generally had the greater power. People are more interested in condemning Hitler than in condemning a terminally ill homeless amputee with the same views and goals as Hitler.

      If the amputee had done the same things as Hitler during his lifetime you can bet that plenty of people would be interested in condemning him because, each person is responsible for his actions. You can't blame groups of people for the actions of individuals that happen to belong to that group the same way you can't send someone to prison because their father/friend/etc. commit a crime. And if you insist on judging the evils of that group as a whole, you must contrast it with the evils of other groups, as well as the good that was done by them. For example, white people produced Hitler but they also brought vaccines and modern agriculture to the developing world, potentially saving many millions more people than Hitler ever killed. More recently Mao killed 2-3 times more people than Hitler just during the Great Leap Forward but I don't see people going out and saying "Chinese=bad".

      Every group has shitty people as well as good people, and the group in power has the potential to do more harm but can also do more good than a group with less power. If you insist on looking at history through the lens of identity politics then look at the entire picture instead of one tiny corner of it.

    88. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because explorers were brutal for profit.

      Sometimes they had to be brutal in order to survive, depending on who they encountered. History rarely has clear-cut villains and heroes, and the fact that one side of a conflict won doesn't mean that it was more evil than the other.

      Given the physical limits of our universe (like the speed of light in a vacuum), there's no conceivable profit motive for crossing interstellar distances to exploit Earth out of all planets.

      The fact that there's no profit motive that you can conceive is irrelevant, and not everything is motivated by profit. Maybe some powerful being likes having primitive colonies the same way some people have ant farms. Maybe water-covered planets in the hospitable zone of a star are super rare and desirable.

      To humans it might seem like interstellar travel is an insurmountable obstacle, but who's to say if that will be true in 500 or even 50 years? Faster-than-light "engines" exist theoretically even if Relativity turns out to be 100% accurate. Jesus Christ you have no imagination.

    89. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If human civilization is any indication of life elsewhere, moral implications are not top of mind for most of the populace. Our civilization advances have been due as much (if not more) to warfare than it has been to peaceful coexistence. Why should we assume any advance alien race was different and followed a philosophy invented by a liberal science fiction television show creator?

    90. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't that nukes will wipe out people directly. The impact of detonations alone will cause huge dust storms that could block out the sun for years. And those dust storms are full of radioactive material. Ecosystems will be wrecked and could no longer support life much less human life.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    91. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it's a good idea, but it's not like we aren't broadcasting radio in all directions anyway.

      Saying "here we are" without any clue as to what might be listening is foolish.

    92. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry, jpaine619 will find a way to blame those other wars on Europeans too. Check back periodically.

    93. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Show me any "savages" that had anything even resembling the vast array of torture devices that had been invented, by Europeans,

      Well, how about leaving an immobilized person near an anthill? Nature provides experiences just as bad as technology. Burning people alive is sort of universal too.

    94. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      In fact, the fastest way for a culture to get ahead on technology, is to steal it. Europe did it to the middle East. America did it to Europe. Now china, Iran, etc do that to the west. The problem is that, generally, the tech is used to bring down the culture that was stolen from. WRT USSR Vs American space flight, note that America was much further ahead of USSR in terms of the technology. Early on, the USSR simply pushed it faster and took more risks. That is why they had so much more lose of mission/life in the early days. That is why USSR never beat America by more than 6 months, and then did not have the tech base to build on for doing the moon.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    95. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Why is he modded flamebait? The Europeans raped/pillaged their way all over the globe from 1400 until ~1916 taking any/all resources, enslaving, then colonizing most of the world, which included America's, Africa, Oceana, and most of South East Asia. China was perhaps the only nation not enslaved/colonized by Europe, esp since china was used to rampaging through most of their Asia neighbors. Seriously, the GP and higher up, are spot on. History teaches us that signalling to others that we are here is one of the bigger mistakes we can make. We like to think that it will be like 'independance day' at worse, when in reality it is far more likely to be 'the forever war' or far more likely, we are simply dodo birds.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    96. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Zero chance of humanity being 100% killed by nukes, unless Russia has about 50 of the 100 Mt tzar bombas ( though, Putin is claiming they now have multiples of these on torpedoes and missiles ). Far more likely if humanity was wiped off earth, it will be through chemicals and/or physical destruction of the atmosphere/water. IOW, AGW is far more likely to wipe us out than will be war.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    97. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Add in Russians and Chinese on that. wicked.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    98. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Cooking ppl alive comes to mind about torture. Sacrifices. Tying up and the cutting open enemies, to allow buzzards to eat them slowly strikes me as torture. Truthfully, all of mankind has developed wicked ways to harm all sorts of ppl.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    99. Re: Is it a good idea? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      More importantly, they would be very likely to think of us in the same way we think of ants and small birds/animals. In fact, we would likely be more like dodo birds to them.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    100. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's because their sense of guilt is greater than their sense of curiosity. They don't even think as far as googling an unfamiliar word combination. Mention of taboo word triggers Pavlov reaction, all other circuits are disabled because if they would start thinking about taboo words they would be complicit in the thought crime.

    101. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was just thinking the same thing...

    102. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      This is just wrong. We've seen the effects of high radiation and Humans are little different from other animals, things adapt very rapidly.

    103. Re:Is it a good idea? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Why would you assume the aliens will be any less brutal than the 16th century European explorers?

      Because 16th century European Explorers were psychopathic religious nut jobs who had very poor understanding of biology. They were also highly incentivized to take things from the natives and conquer them.

      If you can travel across interstellar space you have a pretty good understanding that any species that can create such a beacon is "intelligent" and self aware.

      And we honestly have nothing of value for them. They without question would have general AI to do slave labor. And robots are wayyyy better laborers than humans. We're expensive and shit workers. There is no way someone would enslave humans to do labor if they had any better alternative.

      We have a lot of liquid water but there are easier ways to get H20 than traveling across interstellar distances.

      If you can travel across the universe and create general AI then you can almost assuredly answer the questions of consciousness and free will. Presumably the answers were "there is no free will" so they don't believe in God. If you can create an interstellar civilization then presumably you can you aren't all psychopaths. There is a clear evolution of human thought where as a civilization advances they also become more peaceful, more cooperative, less dogmatic and more open. We also generally become more wealthy and wealth eliminates a lot of pressure for violence of "Eat or be Eaten". Once you can travel the stars you presumably have access to nearly limitless energy which means essentially limitless resources.

    104. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we feel bad about clearing out insects if they are in our way? No, we use pesticide on them. Why would you assume aliens would view us as anything other than an infestation that gets in the way of them utilizing some new real estate? They might not, but I don't think it is safe to assume that that a priori.

    105. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm trying to remember when human sacrifice became a thing in Europe.

      Aztecs, Hawaiians, many, many others had human sacrifice.

      Spain has bull fights and a Christian monk stopped the Colosseum games.

      Columbus got a bunch of people sick. I haven't heard anyone explain how he was culpable for that. If he hadn't it would have just postponed the atrocities the Europeans also went through.

    106. Re:Is it a good idea? by magzteel · · Score: 1

      blah blah blah

      Why is it that everything has to be broken down to the level of a 5 year old for you leftist fuckers? Why do you see cultural appropriation and identity politics wherever you look?
      blah blah blah

      Like talking to a goddamn wall...

      Wow. Just wow.
      I didn't think that comment needed a trigger warning or maybe some tags but you sure proved me wrong with that rant.

      It appears I should have broken it down to the level of a 5 year old for you, so here goes:

      Humans since the beginning of time have been sadistic torturers of other human beings. They employed the technology of their time, no matter how simple or sophisticated (to them), to inflict the most awful, painful, slow, tortured deaths on their victims. Five minutes of searching for "Native American torture methods" would prove it to you.

      Europeans may or may not have copied some of the techniques of other cultures. Who knows.
      But I thought it was funny to call it "cultural appropriation" and a product of "Eurocentric revisionist history" to give them the credit.

      I guess I did consider the remote possibility that some crazy humorless SJW snowflake could have been triggered by that.
      Instead it was you! Go figure.

    107. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They may just not have been technically advanced enough to have enough spare time to come up with those ideas.
      You need a proper, stable food supply to afford people whose only job is to invent means of torture.

      I know most people aren't aware of it, but if you're going to comment on it.. You might want to read up on the Incan civilization. They had their own civil service, roads, granaries, and basically welfare and social security for people who were unable to work. Not to mention that all the crops that they bred themselves, such as corn, potatoes, tomatoes, are basically what fed the western world.

    108. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the US was always stealing and spying, playing catch up.
      It's OK when the US does those things...

    109. Re: Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think smoke signals caused all that European plundering? It wouldn't have happened anyway?
      If advanced aliens are looking for us they would find us anyway, same as the Europeans exploring and colonising. If the aliens are into it, they will be doing it already.

    110. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it hilarious that you seem to be more upset than him, and you call him a snowflake. On behalf of nobody besides myself, take your cry baby sensitive self back to whatever rally this conversation took you away from.

    111. Re:Is it a good idea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you mean inventing civilization and extending your lifespan from ~20 years to ~100?

      The Horror! The Horror!

    112. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Upset? Hardly. I took the time to use facts and logic. Your side only has the feelz. It's like y'all are absolutely terrified that facts will shit all over your arguments.. Well, that's because they will..

    113. Re:Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      Nice.. 7 paragraphs of rebuttal along with explanations and reasoning and you cherry pick a couple of sentences.. Well done Frosty.

    114. Re: Is it a good idea? by jpaine619 · · Score: 1

      I don't disagree that every culture has come up with some inventive torture devices. Nor is my statement regarding the European methods to be interpreted as white-guilt or cultural guilt. It was simply a statement that we have excelled at it. That's all.. We took our technology and used every last drop of imagination and industrial know-how to invent the most fucked up devices.. We took 1st place.

      That was all I was saying from the outset.. It's like y'all can't acknowledge two things at once.. Everybody tortures but one group managed to out-shine everyone else....

      Maybe in 200 years we'll all be talking about how the (insert nationality here) took torture to even greater levels with direct brain implants to give pain without damaging the body.. Or some such shit...

      The sad thing is that if I thought of it right now, someone else has thought of it and is probably trying to invent it..

    115. Re:Is it a good idea? by magzteel · · Score: 1

      Nice.. 7 paragraphs of rebuttal along with explanations and reasoning and you cherry pick a couple of sentences.. Well done Frosty.

      You responded to a joke about "cultural appropriation" with 7 paragraphs of rebuttal, explanations, and reasoning.
      And then YOU call ME a snowflake.

      Is it really so hard to just say "Oops, my bad"? You probably have no problem doing that in person.

    116. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      When in the history of mankind have we seen the after effects of thousands of nuclear detonations? What we have seen is wild life being exposed to radiation in certain areas: Chernobyl, Fukushima, etc but these did not involve detonations. The last real detonations were done in the 50s and the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombs were in the kiloton range, not the megaton that each warhead possesses. The Bikini atoll was bombed with megaton bombs; residents still have not been allowed to return due to high levels of radiation.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    117. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Thousands of nuclear detonations over the whole of the Earth is a tiny amount of radiation compared to what we've observed.

    118. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Are you discounting that thousands of megaton nuclear devices would leave a huge amount of radiation all over the Earth? Fukushima and Chernobyl did not involve detonations but humans can't live there. Bikini Atoll is still too irradiated for humans to return. Also you're discounting that the radiation will not stay in one place the dust will spread. Lastly you're ignoring that ecosystems will be so wrecked so humans (and most life) won't die out immediately but slowly over time.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    119. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Hiroshima and Nagasaki are doing fine today. We've already set off as many nukes as we have in the global arsenal for testing purposes, the radiation dissipates pretty rapidly. Sure, if you nuke one spot repeatedly that spot will be unlivable for a long time, but we don't have enough nukes to do that everywhere and we don't even have enough to nuke each spot once to begin with. The ecosystem recovers much faster than Humans in an area do, overall it's a net win for the environment when Humans nuke eachother because animals and plants other than Humans tend to have much more rapid lifecycles (not that that's a reason to justify or warrant nuking people, just that "but the environment" is a pretty lame argument against nukes.)

    120. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Hiroshima and Nagasaki are doing fine today.

      The strength of Little Boy (15 kt) and Fat Man (21 kt) are far, far less powerful than each warhead of a nuclear missile which ranges in the megatons.

      We've already set off as many nukes as we have in the global arsenal for testing purposes, the radiation dissipates pretty rapidly.

      Your first assertion is a complete and utter lie. The US and Russia each possess thousands of warheads each.

      Your second assertion is also a lie as the half-life of Plutonium 239 is 24,000 years. The half-life of Uranium 235 is 703 million years.

      Sure, if you nuke one spot repeatedly that spot will be unlivable for a long time, but we don't have enough nukes to do that everywhere and we don't even have enough to nuke each spot once to begin with.

      Again, the US and Russia have thousands of warheads and those are those that are currently in service not including ones that are awaiting dismantling or out of service. That also does not include other nations weapons.

      The ecosystem recovers much faster than Humans in an area do, overall it's a net win for the environment when Humans nuke eachother because animals and plants other than Humans tend to have much more rapid lifecycles (not that that's a reason to justify or warrant nuking people, just that "but the environment" is a pretty lame argument against nukes.)

      Please go to the Bikini Atoll and see for yourself. Go to Fukushima or Chernobyl and see for yourself if you don't believe me.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    121. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      The strength of Little Boy (15 kt) and Fat Man (21 kt) are far, far less powerful than each warhead of a nuclear missile which ranges in the megatons.

      Radiation isn't determined by load, it's determined by load and inefficiency of the warhead.

      Your first assertion is a complete and utter lie. The US [wikipedia.org] and Russia [wikipedia.org] each possess thousands of warheads each.

      Now look at how many have been set off, I haven't lied just because you fail to look up all the details used to draw a comparison.

      Your second assertion is also a lie as the half-life of Plutonium 239 [wikipedia.org] is 24,000 years. The half-life of Uranium 235 [wikipedia.org] is 703 million years.

      It's not Plutonium or Uranium that put out the radiation, it's the daughter products, you idiot.

      Again, the US and Russia have thousands of warheads and those are those that are currently in service not including ones that are awaiting dismantling or out of service. That also does not include other nations weapons.

      Again, look up how many have been tested.

      Please go to the Bikini Atoll and see for yourself. Go to Fukushima or Chernobyl and see for yourself if you don't believe me.

      Are you joking? Bikini Atoll is doing fine, Fukushima was recent, and Chernobyl has become a poster child for what nature can do without Humans around. None of those are examples in favor of the point you're attempting to make.

    122. Re: Is it a good idea? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Radiation isn't determined by load, it's determined by load and inefficiency of the warhead.

      Well that's most absurd thing I've ever read. Radiation is proportional to the amount of nuclear material in the warhead. Fat Man had 14lbs of Pu-239.

      Now look at how many have been set off, I haven't lied just because you fail to look up all the details used to draw a comparison.

      You said: "We've already set off as many nukes as we have in the global arsenal for testing purposes"

      The link clearly says: 1054 test detonations, 4000 stockpile, 1800 active for the US alone. You lied. It's that simple.

      It's not Plutonium or Uranium that put out the radiation, it's the daughter products, you idiot.

      Bahahaha. You do know that each subsequent fission produces more radiation right? Pu-239 become U-235 which become Ba-141 and Kr-92 which then are radioactive and decay.

      Again, look up how many have been tested.

      I did. Clearly you did not. US: 1054, Russia 715. Both of them are far, far lower than the current stockpiles. They are also much lower than the peak stockpiles because both countries realized long ago they had more than enough warhead to assure mutual destruction. Again, you lied.

      Are you joking? Bikini Atoll is doing fine,

      Another blatant lie?

      "Bikini Atoll remains uninhabitable for humans due to what United Nations special rapporteur Clin Georgescu reported in 2012 as 'near-irreversible environmental contamination.'"

      None of those are examples in favor of the point you're attempting to make.

      The point I made and you ignored that radiation doesn't go away easily. Radiation is still high in those areas and Fukushima nor Chernobyl were hit by bombs.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    123. Re: Is it a good idea? by NicknameUnavailable · · Score: 1

      Well that's most absurd thing I've ever read. Radiation is proportional to the amount of nuclear material in the warhead. Fat Man had 14lbs of Pu-239.

      Nope, it's proportional to the daughter products produced by the warhead and the quantity of them. Modern nukes are more efficient than older ones.

      You said: "We've already set off as many nukes as we have in the global arsenal for testing purposes"

      The link clearly says: 1054 test detonations, 4000 stockpile, 1800 active for the US alone. You lied. It's that simple.

      Get a better link, your source is wrong.

      Bahahaha. You do know that each subsequent fission produces more radiation right? Pu-239 become U-235 which become Ba-141 and Kr-92 which then are radioactive and decay.

      You clearly have no comprehension of nuclear physics.

      I did. Clearly you did not. US: 1054, Russia 715. Both of them are far, far lower than the current stockpiles. They are also much lower than the peak stockpiles because both countries realized long ago they had more than enough warhead to assure mutual destruction. Again, you lied.

      Your information is wrong.

      Another blatant lie?

      "Bikini Atoll remains uninhabitable for humans due to what United Nations special rapporteur Clin Georgescu reported in 2012 as 'near-irreversible environmental contamination.'"

      So let me get this straight, your claim is that because it's unsafe for Humans it will "destroy" the environment, even though the wildlife there is thriving simply by removing Humans? That's pretty shit "logic" you're using.

      The point I made and you ignored that radiation doesn't go away easily. Radiation is still high in those areas and Fukushima nor Chernobyl were hit by bombs.

      High radiation isn't an issue for the environment, it's an issue for Humans. We don't have enough nukes to fuck things up for Humans worldline and we certainly don't have enough nukes to screw up the environment because we're more likely to nuke eachother than the rainforests. Everything you said is based in failed assumptions and shitty sources.

  2. Let's never do that then. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To paraphrase Monty Python. This man is hiding. Sir please stand up. *Boom*

    1. Re:Let's never do that then. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
  3. That may not be a good idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We really have no idea if whatever's out there will be friendly or not, so announcing our position to the rest of the galaxy is a big gamble

  4. If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If we're not alone in the universe- I would like to know about our neighbours before they know about us.

    Sending an unsolicited welcome beacon into the night could be catastrophic. If they're able to read it and respond they're probably more advanced than us. If they're more advanced than us they might not want to share the galaxy with another species who one day might evolve to challenge them or threaten them. There is no guarantee that any aliens out there would share our sentimentality to life. Or even want to meet alien species.

    If their civilization has advanced far enough to be guided by Artificial Intelligence, certainly AI would decide the logical thing to do is remove a future threat before it becomes a threat. This isn't Star Trek, you can't guarantee that Mr. and Mrs. Greenface want to drink Romulan Ale with you and be best buds with you. Any species that survives to the space age needs some logic. Logic will tell you intelligent alien species could be a potential threat.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    1. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Profile of intelligent aliens.

      Based on what we know about animals on earth: the animals that are most intelligent are usually hunting animals; they may be omnivores, but by and large, most of the intelligent animals on earth do some hunting. (there are exceptions such as elephants of course). In general, to be a successful herbivore you need to be able to hide, or you need to be able to run fast. To be a successful predator or omnivore, a little intelligence can help.

      Think humans, chimps, dolphins, pigs, dogs, crows, bears, octopuses, most of the more intelligent animals eat some meat when they can and hunt others.

      So, any alien species that is intelligent probably evolved from omnivore or carnivore predecessors. From a personality standpoint that could mean many things, but it certainly would involve some view that some animals are beneath them and that life gives way for life.

      We are more likely to encounter a species of bear-like predators than cow-like pacifists.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Merk42 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe they've evolved past needing meat and became vegetarian! Then they'll come to Earth and never shut up about it.

    3. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by iisan7 · · Score: 2

      It seems to me that logic doesn't give a clear answer, as (1) cooperation may help your civilization to grow and exploit more faster; development is not a zero sum game; (2) any alien civilization should also expect that there is probably out there a more advanced alien civilization that it would need to compete with, and it might aid and use ally itself with smaller threats to defend itself against the larger threat. Ultimately, which approach is taken would probably be decided more by the context in which the alien society evolved.

    4. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by danbert8 · · Score: 2

      Assuming the extra terrestrial life is well more advanced than we are, it stands to reason that they can detect us whether we broadcast a beacon or not. Given sufficient technology to travel between star systems, they probably have sufficient technology to properly scout out star systems before starting the journey...

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    5. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they're hunters -- at least omnivores.

      As Niven put it, "how much intelligence does it take to sneak up on a leaf?"

      (Yes, that oversimplifies a bit. It make take some intelligence to avoid predators.)

    6. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep. Pellegrino's rules:

      - Rule 1. Aliens will believe their survival is more important than our survival.
      - Rule 2. Wimps don't become top dogs.
      - Rule 3. Aliens will assume the the first two rules apply to us as well.

    7. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Logic will tell you intelligent alien species could be a potential threat.

      Logic would tell you that any species stuck on a rock which has the technology to wipe itself out and barely blow smoke signals your way will probably either (1) develop sufficiently to get off the rock or (2) destroy themselves. It'd be a substantial waste of resources to go out of your way to destroy or even go in the general vicinity of us given the odds of (2). Well before (1) happens you could monitor and decide whether to wipe out the population. We're so far from "intelligent alien species" in a galactic sense that it may be thousands or hundreds of thousands of years before any alien species has to worry about monitoring and deciding our fate.

      The whole reason Star Trek work is because "warp drive" magic. I have little hope that "warp drive" or similar exists. That leaves all intragalactic activities so far beyond our puny existences that it's really hard to imagine what an actual intelligent alien species would be like. My guess would be some species that lives for hundreds of thousands of years which take for granted that they'll spend 20% of their life shuffling between different star systems.

    8. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah that little eugenics intuition "seems right" but guess what? it isn't.

      The fact is, the thing that separates us most from animals, what makes us "more intelligent" than them, is the very fact that we started farming. Growing our own food. The perversion of farming living things came later and was a step back. Ebb and flow and all.

    9. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's vegans

    11. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Maybe they've evolved past needing meat and became vegetarian! Then they'll come to Earth and never shut up about it.

      All the more reason not to advertise our location to them.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    12. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Yeah that little eugenics intuition "seems right" but guess what? it isn't.

      The fact is, the thing that separates us most from animals, what makes us "more intelligent" than them, is the very fact that we started farming. Growing our own food. The perversion of farming living things came later and was a step back. Ebb and flow and all.

      The increase in calories allowed us to have more for stoking our brains; but the fact is, we evolved from already smart creatures. Chimpanzees aren't farmers and they're already close to us in intelligence. I think that the ability for us to start farming is proof of intelligence already existing.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    13. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that logic doesn't give a clear answer, as (1) cooperation may help your civilization to grow and exploit more faster; development is not a zero sum game; (2) any alien civilization should also expect that there is probably out there a more advanced alien civilization that it would need to compete with, and it might aid and use ally itself with smaller threats to defend itself against the larger threat. Ultimately, which approach is taken would probably be decided more by the context in which the alien society evolved.

      When it comes to gambling the future of humanity- I tend to be risk adverse. I'd rather carry on with the status quo of no alien interference than gamble that they might help progress us (with the flip side being that they might wipe us off the face of the earth).

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    14. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Detecting us is not easy. We make some noise, but most of it drowns in the noise from the much bigger sun.

      Think of it the other way around. Currently, we think we are alone. But then, someone see a signal (laser, radio or whatever) from a place 10LY away. I.e. we found someone. Someone who apparently can send signals, but probably don't know how to get around.

      What to do? Spend a lot on looking their way, see if they perhaps is a threat. A nuclear powered rocket, built with current tech, can get there in a few hundred years. With the speed it achieves, it'll do a lot of damage just by ramming the planet. Even more if it carries a few thousand tsar bombas and deploy them optimally. Destroy them while we have a chance? Before they do this to us?

    15. Re:If Extra Terrestrials exist... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They may have evolved beyond eating vegetables as well. Maybe they can eat only concentrated nutrient pellets and never shut up about it as eating a bean will kill them. Eating plants becomes therefore a murder.

  5. Hi, Universe! We're here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just waiting for you to come invade and take over our planet..

  6. Wrong analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My porch light only attracts bugs, particularly moths that fly in when the door is open and eat my clothes, and mosquitoes during the right season.

    I do not think we want to attract here the ET versions of moths and mosquitoes.

  7. That's a serious ping time by Nkwe · · Score: 2

    a star about 40 light-years away that hosts seven exoplanets, three of which are potentially habitable. If the signal is spotted from either of these nearby systems, the study finds, the same megawatt laser could be used to send a brief message in the form of pulses similar to Morse code.

    So this would be an 80 year round trip ping time? Someone far away would also have to be looking our direction when we light it up. For argument's sake let's say we want to allow a 10 year window for someone to notice our beacon. This means that we would have to shine the beacon for 10 years and then wait up to 90 years for a response?

    1. Re:That's a serious ping time by losfromla · · Score: 1

      Only if they don't have faster than light travel or communication ability. But definitely 50 years minimum, again if we rule out that they can move backward in time.

      --
      Only I can judge you.
    2. Re:That's a serious ping time by Sarten-X · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's okay! It's only 1 or 2 megawatts continuously for those 10 years!

      That's only $21 million in electricity costs alone, and 100,000 metric tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere. Surely, that's a small price to pay to be good celestial neighbors...

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:That's a serious ping time by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's okay! It's only 1 or 2 megawatts continuously for those 10 years!

      That's only $21 million in electricity costs alone, and 100,000 metric tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere. Surely, that's a small price to pay to be good celestial neighbors...

      So.....just the equivalent of a handful of bitcoin miners? That's not too bad.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    4. Re:That's a serious ping time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Only if they don't have faster than light travel or communication ability.

      Does your faster than light communication work without a receiver? That seems unlikely.

    5. Re:That's a serious ping time by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Yeah,
      and we have to take into account that we and the other solar system are moving, so we can not aim directly at it but where it will be in 40 years.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  8. why not both? by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    how will the aliens be able to tell if we support veterans or if we're selling the Devil's lettuce?

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  9. Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by atrex · · Score: 2

    “Meeting an advanced civilization could be like Native Americans encountering Columbus. That didn’t turn out so well.”

    1. Re:Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      False. The social development of a space-faring civilization is further along than of a sea-faring one. If the aliens possess the technology to visit us, they've also mastered genetic engineering to the point where they've eliminated their reptilian tendencies such as greed, power, etc. One of two things will happen leading up to a potential first contact: 1) they'll see the utility in teaming up with us but that would mean sharing their technology with us, so we can "catch up" or 2) completely ignore us and look for another Earth-like planet which shouldn't be a problem.

    2. Re: Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by c6gunner · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's where he was wrong; it turned out very well.

    3. Re:Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by judoguy · · Score: 1

      “Meeting an advanced civilization could be like Native Americans encountering Columbus. That didn’t turn out so well.”

      You mean we'd become the casino planet?

      --
      Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
    4. Re:Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or 3) regard as a potential future threat and take of us while it's easy to do so.

    5. Re: Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by atrex · · Score: 1

      I think what little is left of the Native Americans would sharply disagree.

    6. Re:Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That didnâ(TM)t turn out so well.

      You mean the birth of a nation which is now host of the world's most advanced technology was a mistake?

    7. Re: Remember Stephen Hawking's warning by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      You think that because you watched Dances with Wolves and now believe that you're an expert on American Indians. It's the soft racism of the western left; making broad generalizations about the lives, beliefs, motives, and desires of a large group of people based on nothing other than their genetic lineage.

  10. Re:Yeah, just what we need by Tuidjy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well, if the laser is red, you can hardly blame the aliens for 'red light district' being an universal concept. And if it is not, then we should not risk advertising our present with other hues, either.

    Basic prudence dictates that we do not attract attention to ourselves before knowing what that attention will bring along.

    --
    No good deed goes unpunished...
  11. Morse code? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    My ISP gives me internet via Laser fiber, those guys need to read up on current technology.
    They could send the encyclopedia galactica every second if they use all the possible color and other channeling methods.
    Use morse for the decryption manual as header.

    1. Re:Morse code? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Google Shannon-Hartley capacity theorem.

  12. Why the hell would we want to do that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    We want to find them, not the other way around. What are we advertising, and to whom?

    I'm really hyped about the idea of making meaningful contact with extraterrestrial intelligent life but I'd much rather it be with ones that are less capable than we are. I think Hawking had the right idea: we should keep our heads down and our ears open.

    1. Re:Why the hell would we want to do that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty sure you don't have much to worry about, but....
      Can I interest you in a 100% Guaranteed Alien-proof shelter?

  13. How much RF energy do we broadcast? by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

    The study author is confused. We've been broadcasting an RF beacon for about a century.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    1. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's indistinguishable from background noise a few light years out. Hence the entire point of this study on how to purposefully send a signal that is distinguishable at a distance.

    2. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by HornWumpus · · Score: 0

      No. Check your facts.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    3. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that's true then how come the people of Omicron Persei 8 managed to watch Single Female Lawyer?

    4. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's indistinguishable from background noise a few light years out. Hence the entire point of this study on how to purposefully send a signal that is distinguishable at a distance.

      No. Check your facts.

      He's correct: our RF broadcasts are indistinguishable from background noise at even a few parsecs distance. The stars turn out to be a very very long way away.

      There are two exceptions: the Arecibo planetary radar, and ballistic missile warning radars.

      But the Arecibo dish is very rarely used as radar, and if it did by coincidence happen to illuminate a star with inhabited planets behind the planet it was looking at... it's likely that it would never point that direction again, ever. The aliens would see one bright blip--if they were looking with an Arecibo sized radio telescope at the right frequency at exactly the right time--but if they look again, nothing.

      Ballistic missile warning radar would be more repeatable, but it sweeps small parts of near-polar sky with a repeat time of 24 hours. So, if they see the blip as the radar passes over their star, unless they look again exactly 24 hours later, again, they won't see anything.

      And, at a hundred parsecs, even those signals are too faint to detect-- they're swamped by the background. The galaxy is 100 thousand parsecs across. So, no: most of the galaxy couldn't hear us even if they had Arecibo-sized telescopes listening.

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    5. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've also heard that the combined amount of aeronautical radar is detectable for around 40 lightyears. This has been the subject of some recent SETI type research projects, to search for such radar signals from other planets as things like TV or radio signals probably aren't detectable and has a limited time of use, but such radar signals would probably be used for a much longer time and supposedly still in use by a higher tech civilization. Such a project was supported by Stephan Hawkings shortly before he died.

      Still, I suspect that the constant broadcast of solar light through our atmosphere or reflecting off of our surface would have detectable signs of free oxygen, chlorophyll and who knows what other signifiers of life, and perhaps intelligent life. We're beginning to get to the point we can hopefully look at the same information from planets around us. I suspect that such is already a much more obivous sign to any group that would otherwise be looking for such signs.

      Posting anonymously because I modded this conversation earlier.

    6. Re:How much RF energy do we broadcast? by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Tell it to SETI. If what you say was true, they would be wasting their time.

      Just how focused do you think radar beams are genius?

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  14. ergo, I am smarter that Stephan Hawkwind by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Steve Hawkwing is dead , he couldn't have been that smart.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:ergo, I am smarter that Stephan Hawkwind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By that logic, nobody ever is smart, because nobody ever has escaped death yet.

    2. Re:ergo, I am smarter that Stephan Hawkwind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Y'all need Jesus.

    3. Re:ergo, I am smarter that Stephan Hawkwind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He still died.

  15. DON'T FUCKING DO IT by F34nor · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Read "The Three Body Problem" before you talk about this shit.

    1. Re: DON'T FUCKING DO IT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Read the Mote in God's Eye before you start talking about scrappy fantasy novels.

    2. Re: DON'T FUCKING DO IT by F34nor · · Score: 1

      I have. Have you read The Three Body Problem?

  16. Random phone call... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...Calling all borg, transformers, etc...

  17. What is Winter Sunlight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The question never asked, the question never answered.

  18. Coal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes! Amazing idea! Lets use "clean" coal energy for the 2MW output required for 40 years to reach the closest star system.

  19. To save your planet click here to unsubscribe. ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "There once was an infant lost in the woods, crying its heart out, wondering why no one answered, drawing down the wolves..."
    The Forge Of God
    -- Greg Bear.

  20. First Contact in 45 years by Only+Time+Will+Tell · · Score: 1

    This is good, we only have 45 more years until the Vulkans find us.

  21. Just Don't Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Avoid pointing any kind of radar or laser beam into Magellanic Clouds, and avoid keeping any jewelry near the capacitors. Or don't. For it could be terrible or awesome.

  22. Other than Halloween my porch light is off by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    Have you ever actually seen what gets attracted to a blazing porch light?

    You get large amounts of Bugs, and if you're lucky, some bats or spiders come to eat them.

    If we're doing an Intergalactic Porch Light, I'd hope someone would plan on a nearby bug zapper.

    1. Re:Other than Halloween my porch light is off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I leave mine on all the time when its warm so that the treefrogs can find food more easily.

    2. Re: Other than Halloween my porch light is off by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      You get large amounts of Bugs

      No problem; by the time they get here our Starship Troopers will be ready and waiting.

  23. Dumb by NotFamous · · Score: 1

    This has got to be the dumbest idea in the history of dumb ideas. Let's send a signal out into the darkness to let everyone out there know we are here. You might as well be posting on Facebook , "We are going to be out of the country for a couple months. Putting the Mercedes and the Lamborghini in the garage now for safe keeping."

    --
    Some settling may occur during posting.
    1. Re:Dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You might as well be posting on Facebook , "We are going to be out of the country for a couple months. Putting the Mercedes and the Lamborghini in the garage now for safe keeping."

      And I see people do exactly this ALL THE TIME.

    2. Re:Dumb by gtall · · Score: 1

      Well, it will be a few 100 years before they get here. Hyperspace only exists in TV land. Wormholes require a black holes worth of energy to keep open.

  24. n choose 2 where n = # of visible stars? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many stars are there?

    How many stars could each of those stars be *possibly* looking at?

    How many stars could each of those stars be monitoring?

    This seems like the SETI equivalent of winning the PowerBall back to back...

  25. The 3 Body Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want a awesome book series about this exact type of thing, I recommend `The Three Body Problem`. It's a great book to get into (translated) Chinese scifi literature

  26. Sure, whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're going to see that light and say "Hey, we sent you creimer, we're not taking him back no matter how many lasers you point at us!"

    1. Re:Sure, whatever... by The+Original+CDR · · Score: 0

      Mod down. Chris/creimer announced on Twitter that he left Slashdot. Ironically because his trolls are more interested in harassing other users than paying any attention to him.

    2. Re:Sure, whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're drawn to any mention of the name "creimer" like a shitmoth to a large shit. Amazing that someone who isn't creimer is very very concerned that everyone know that creimer "left" Slashdot (for the 36th time).

      You leave Slashdot more often than KISS makes farewell tours.

    3. Re:Sure, whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're drawn to any mention of the name "creimer" like a shitmoth to a large shit. [slashdot.org]

      Funny how you have creimer's old comments bookmarked to prove your point. Oh, that's right. He hurt you covfefe. It's been what... two years now?

    4. Re:Sure, whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, if I didn't bookmark them, no one would believe your comments exist! A 48 year old virgin talking about his dumps publicly?

      PS: Who the hell is creimer? I linked to a comment by __aaclcg7560.

    5. Re:Sure, whatever... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hoser!

  27. Maybe Thanos would locate us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... and think we have the reality stone... so, bad idea!

  28. Obligatory xkcd by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What, nobody has posted the obligatory xkcd yet?

    fish.

    ... and also, are you sure we're looking for the right thing? ants

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Obligatory xkcd by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1
      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
  29. What a precision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And to do it, you need to target that alien planet exactly where it will be in 4 years (4 light years away) or in 40 years (...).
    Also using a telescope to... "re-focus" a laser, sound childish...

    At that distance, I presume the planet will pass through the laser beam in about 1/100 seconds, so that aliens have to be with the eyes on us!

    It is saying that some of these aliens have come to Earth many years later after A-bombs.
    This was simple, why complicate with the lasser, we have enough for sending a "resume"!

  30. If we started 20,000 years ago, DUH DUH DUH ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "a beacon strong enough to attract attention from as far as 20,000 light years away"

    Do the people writing and editing stuff like this EVER engage their brain ?

  31. How About We... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    focus on saving the planet from global warming instead? We already all fucked.

  32. Our first contact... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh great. Now our first contact with an alien species will be from their lawyers who are suing us for blinding their client with our laser.

    Where are we gonna find 4 1/2 billion kwatloos?

  33. What could possibly go wrong? by peterofoz · · Score: 1

    No seriously, that is a fundamentally really bad idea. The earth already emits a lot of radio waves, why invite potential disaster of an advanced race capable of navigating the stars. Sure they might be friendly, but they could equally destroy the planet or decide we're tasty snacks to harvest.

    1. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're advanced enough to navigate the stars they can find us anyway.

  34. what the ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Boss: Hey guys, we have to come up with an idea to get us millions of dollars of funding that is completely useless and stupid.
    Intern: I HAVE AN IDEA!

  35. Someone needs to read Charles Pellegrino by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's all very well if interstellar travel is impossible. But it's not, it's just slow (assuming no FTL drives). We already have theoretical means to push objects to a substantial fraction of lightspeed.

    So consider the thesis of Pellegrino's The Killing Star or Flying to Valhalla:

    - Rule 1. Aliens will believe their survival is more important than our survival.
    - Rule 2. Wimps don't become top dogs.
    - Rule 3. Aliens will assume the the first two rules apply to us as well.

    ...and get ready to duck (and cover).

  36. Re:Yeah, just what we need by dunnomattic · · Score: 5, Informative

    "If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skins into their clothing. And, if we're very, very lucky, they'll do it in that order."
    -Zoe, Firefly (2002)

    --
    ...when everything is a crime, everyone is a criminal.
  37. Deru kugi wa utareru by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The nail that sticks up gets hammered down.

    Don't turn on that laser.

  38. Porch lights attract bugs by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    Porch lights attract bugs and it usually doesn't end well for the bugs.
    On the other hand, those bugs don't have interstellar flight capability and, presumably, particle weapons ...

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Porch lights attract bugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, bug squash you.

  39. Re:Yeah, just what we need by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    "Of course they're cute NOW. But in a second they're going to turn MEAN and UGLY somehow and then there are going to be a million MORE of them! ... Jesus, didn't ANY of you watch the show!?"

    -- Guy Fleegman, Galaxy Quest (1999)

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  40. I wonder if it will flash Bates Motel by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

    And have that broken down look when the visitors stop by?

    --
    Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
  41. The goggles... they do nothing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get annoyed when my neighbor's driveway security light goes on for a few minutes. Can you imagine what blasting lifeforms with that focused light could do?

    War of the Worlds wouldn't just be a book anymore.

  42. Patio Lanterns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, this design can be Earth's porch light. But what can be Earth's patio lanterns, huh?

  43. Generating new light? by Trogre · · Score: 2

    Wouldn't it be a better idea to focus the gigawatts of excess solar energy our planet is absorbing every day, and help fight climate change at the same time?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  44. Roxanne by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You don't have to put out the red light.

    Rooooooooxxxxxxaaaannnnnneeeeeee!

  45. 40 light years. by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 1

    Soo.... assuming we build this thing , we 'might' know if it works in 40 years + whatever time it takes a civilization to recognize it and try to reply ( assuming WE recognize their reply), but say it is really fast they find the signal then reply really quickly we can expect the message to take a minimum of 40 years to get there. So basically build it. Wait 100 years, before you can even BEGIN to reasonable expect a reply. ( that of coarse covers the first 2 possible planets which we have no evidence actually host life, little loan intelligent life.

    sounds like your chances of success are much less then winning the lottery. I suppose why not if it doesn't cost more a few million to build and operate for 100 years.

    --
    âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  46. the earth is a black light trap by jsepeta · · Score: 1

    let them come, and we'll devour them.

    wait, they'll probably decide to put an intergalactic highway system here.

    --
    Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
  47. Personally I would rather they didn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally I would rather they didn't, has anybody considered that there may be a race out there like humans, who in all probability if they found us would be more advanced than us. Based on human colonization around the globe this sort of contact will end up going very badly for us, all of us, and thats only considering we encounter beings who are like us.

  48. We should hide too! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the reason why we are having such a hard time finding evidence of extraterrestrial life, is because they are all hiding. Maybe all the intelligent creatures out there have discovered that the universe is a hostile place and if you want to survive you better be good at camouflage. Everybody else is doing their best to remove all traces of their existence from anyone looking for them. We on the other hand are getting ready to ring the dinner bell, err...send out a 'porch light'.

  49. chance of success - infinitesimal by swell · · Score: 2

    "Such a signal could be detectable by alien astronomers performing a cursory survey of our section of the Milky Way -- especially if those astronomers live in nearby systems, such as around Proxima Centauri, the nearest star to Earth"

    The good people at MIT seem to have overlooked a small detail. Space is really big. Douglas Adams discovered this long ago- please bone up on your studies.

    In order to scan the universe with your narrowly focused telescope, you need to be able to see a width of 360 degrees and vertically at 360 degrees. Virtually an infinite number of adjustments in both directions. In order to see the puny laser beam, you'd have to pause your telescope in that direction long enough to identify it and separate it from nearby noise; perhaps for a few seconds(10?) If every position of the telescope requires 'a few seconds', it would take an extremely long time to scan the universe.

    From the other perspective- if you want to point your laser to every point in the sky, you have the same problem. A nearly infinite number of points, depending upon the width of the beam. If you are sending some kind of signal, let's say a burst that takes a few seconds (10?) in each direction, it would take an extremely long time to beam across the universe.

    What are the chances that your beam and the telescope at the other planet will meet?
    Infinitely small.

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:chance of success - infinitesimal by swell · · Score: 2

      Ah, but suppose you aim your beam at a specific planet that seems as if it might possibly support life? Well, now you can aim your beam right there! But first, you have to remember that you are seeing the star/planet as it was a long time ago. You have to calculate from its heading where it might be when your beam arrives, far into the future. That seems possible. But then you have to correct for every gravitational field and other anomaly between here and there that will bend your beam and send it off in another direction. And after all that work and expense, you have only accounted for one possible life supporting planet- how many others will you waste your time on?

      Sorry, I'm taking a negative tone here. But here on earth, we have some real problems that will require the best brains and a lot of investment to deal with. Space will be there, space can wait.

      --
      ...omphaloskepsis often...
  50. Its too early by TomGreenhaw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We are not ready for ET.

    Here are some possible outcomes:
    They are dangerous and if they come here they have better technology than we do - we're screwed.

    They are nice beings, but correctly conclude we are not. They decide its better to eradicate us before we become the scourge of the galaxy - we're screwed.

    They are curious but see no benefit in engaging with us directly

    They are not curious and correctly conclude we have nothing to offer their more advanced society. The universe is a big empty place and there is space enough for everyone.

    My personal favorite - faster than light travel is fantasy and they will never bother to come.

    In any case, the likelihood that they are wondrous benevolent beings who want to give us all kinds of nice stuff without unintended consequences is basically zero. No need to attract attention. Do something useful instead.

    --
    Greed is the root of all evil.
    1. Re:Its too early by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aliens had 2-3 billion years to see that Earth was fostering life and, presumably, haven't showed up, or did and didn't bother to stick around.

      Either we aren't interesting or there aren't any aliens travelling around the galaxy.

    2. Re:Its too early by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your lack of imagination betrays you as having... a lack of imagination!

      I don't want to get too far down into the weeds on this one, so I'll only pick one quote that stands out. "They are curious but see no benefit in engaging with us directly".

      Um, what? Why is that the only possible outcome of "They are curious"?? Wouldn't curiosity almost inevitably imply "engaging with us", whether directly, or indirectly, or some way? What you seem to have created is the statement, "They are not curious", and done so by stating the exact opposite.

      Good debate, keep up the 'good' work (and by good, I mean bad).

    3. Re:Its too early by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here's another possibility:

      Being orders of magnitude more advanced than us, they already know more about us than we know about ourselves. They gained that knowledge not by flying here in a rusty old saucer and abducting humans, but by simply pressing a button from clear across the galaxy. They find our civilization interesting, but ultimately stuck to the galactic covenant of "hands off" until we reach a minimum level of technology. That minimum is orders of magnitude higher than what we have today.

      Fortunately for us, they are a non-hostile people, like all existing advanced civilizations, having survived the evolutionary period where they reach the ability to cause their own extinction, but still haven't lost the inclination to do it.

    4. Re:Its too early by fish_in_the_c · · Score: 2

      "In any case, the likelihood that they are wondrous benevolent beings who want to give us all kinds of nice stuff without unintended consequences is basically zero. No need to attract attention. Do something useful instead."

      I would add, is probably the result of a residual idea of wanting a God or gods to come to our aid and explain the universe to us.

      --
      âoeTolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons.
  51. And this is a good idea, why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any space faring creatures have at least one thing mastered - survival. I'm not sure any space faring creatures exist, but inviting them over, even if no one "out there" is likely to see it is probably a bad idea.

  52. We Subgenii have a saying: by sheramil · · Score: 2

    "DON'T Pray. You never know what might be listening."

    It would be a monumental effort, but perhaps a less dangerous method might be to set up the laser in the Centaurus system. That way, if any "bad people show up" (cf The Beastie Boys), they might not notice us. Too bad if there are any intelligent Centaurans, but they should have thought of this first and put a laser in OUR system.

  53. Re:Yeah, just what we need by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 1

    We STF don't want to attract any Reavers!

  54. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  55. Don't be the guys on the shore by joe_frisch · · Score: 1

    At least in recent human history, when the guys in the boats meet the guys on the shore, it doesn't end well for the guys on the shore.

    When we have the technology to travel interstellar distances, I'm happy with the idea of trying to meet new friends.

    1. Re:Don't be the guys on the shore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The shore guys wins often enough, but that don't result in big changes so no 'sensationalism'.

      The Vikings came in boats. They found America before Columbus. But their settlement was overrun for some reason, and the whole thing forgotten. Columbus had firearms . . .

  56. Naked Jets sound awesome by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Rather than jets with bits hanging out, I was imagining jets with no visible skin, just a horrifying skeletal framework flying impossibly through the sky, with a guy in a skull hemet inside grinning down at the burning landscape below.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  57. Re:Yeah, just what we need by xQx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Agreed.
    Let me link you the Fermi Paradox: We're First, We're Rare, or We're Fucked.
    https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05...

    Specifically Possibility 4: There are scary predator civilizations out there, and most intelligent life knows better than to broadcast any outgoing signals and advertise their location. This is an unpleasant concept and would help explain the lack of any signals being received by the SETI satellites. It also means that we might be the super naive newbies who are being unbelievably stupid and risky by ever broadcasting outward signals; and Carl Sagan's takeaway: “the newest children in a strange and uncertain cosmos should listen quietly for a long time, patiently learning about the universe and compa, ring notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand.”

  58. Attract by exxaminer · · Score: 1

    But..is that really a good idea?

  59. The Dark Forest Theory by RobinH · · Score: 1

    As someone who just recently read the Three Body Problem trilogy, please, Please, PLEASE don't announce our presence to the galaxy at large! That's a horrible idea.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  60. How stupid can you possibly be? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a hostile environment (space) broadcasting something like: "hey look how comfortable we are! whiiiiiiiiiii"

  61. Re:Yeah, just what we need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thank you.

  62. A Stupid Idea. What if there are hostile aliens ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What if they are hostile aliens searching for raw materials and slaves ? hmmm ??
    Don't assume every one is friendly. I guess no one taught the geniuses who though of this "Stranger Danger"

    Wow.

    If there is extraterrestial life and thier history is anything like human history, it won't be good.

  63. ok now wake up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If these aliens don't notice a planet with tons of space debris then you know...really.
    This SILVER blue planet as already quite a shiny spec.

  64. Alien astronomers? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    More like alien invaders. Hopefully, this will not be used.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  65. Optical SETI by jd · · Score: 1

    Has been looking for such signals for years on this basis. It's far easier than radio. The problem is identifying it.

    The other problem is that almost nobody does OSETI, it's just not fashionable.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  66. Study finds that lazers are light! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Magic!

  67. Re:Yeah, just what we need by farble1670 · · Score: 1

    Carl Sagan's takeaway: “the newest children in a strange and uncertain cosmos should listen quietly for a long time, patiently learning about the universe and compa, ring notes, before shouting into an unknown jungle that we do not understand.”

    The same Carl Sagan that led the committee that designed Voyager's Golden Record that shows our location in the galaxy?

    The drawing in the lower left-hand corner of the cover is the pulsar map previously sent as part of the plaques on Pioneers 10 and 11. It shows the location of the Solar System with respect to 14 pulsars, whose precise periods are given.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  68. They Did This In Oklahoma 50 years Ago by careysub · · Score: 1

    Well, the FAA, not NASA. It was called Operation Bongo II. Is this Operation Bongo III?

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    1. Re:They Did This In Oklahoma 50 years Ago by careysub · · Score: 1

      Oops wrong thread. Go about your business.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  69. The hazards of a first strike by Mike+Van+Pelt · · Score: 1

    I'm assuming there's no such FTL, because based on what we know, that's the way to bet.

    Assuming some xenophobic aliens out there who would want to knock off any potential threats... Part of their calculation has to be "Never merely injure a threat."

    If they were to attack (say, by boosting some relativistic rocks our way) they would have to be pretty dang assured of a one-shot sure-kill.

    Far, *far* safer to just lay low. If FTL is impossible, no matter what Fermi said, it's probably so difficult to do interstellar travel that nobody ever does it. Certainly not in any big way. It would take some very powerful motivation to go to the trouble.

  70. are you for real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because dodo birds used to build cities have machinery, technology etc.
    It would be clear to anyone other than idiots like you, that humans are the most advanced things living on Earth. We could clearly be vastly inferior to the aliens, but don't kid yourself to think we aren't vastly superior to dodo birds.