I really think the best bet is to have smart machines go in and do the really dangerous stuff that could kill a lot of humans. The EOD guys use robots to disable IED's and landmines now, and it has saved many of their lives for sure. As long as there is someone monitoring what those autonomous systems are up to, then "intelligent" decisions can be made by soldiers in the battlefield on how best to use these great resources.
I don't honestly ever see us relying entirely on autonomous systems to do the hard work of planning, coordinating, and executing battle operations. They'll probably fall under helping humans execute a battle plan in some capacity. There is a human element to strategy that we just can't reciprocate with AI. Brilliant Generals with good instincts have helped pave the way for successful military campaigns. Human experience is irreplaceable.
Yeah, I agree, that's why I added this later in the post:
"However, I would think any FM signal would stand out from all that cosmic back-ground noise in the bands we're listening to, so maybe it can work, but only if they initiate the contact and "lower their standards" to our level of technological sophistication."
The other thing is we've assumed a certain band of frequencies more likely to be used due to low background noise. What if they don't even use the electromagnetic spectrum like we do (perhaps something like modulated gravity waves instead)? Or what if they use ends of the spectrum that we can't even sense due to primitive technology? If we don't have the technology to remotely sense the medium they're transmitting in, who knows what we've missed already?
Re:S.E.T.I: We're not advanced enough!
on
Is SETI Worth It?
·
· Score: 1
You raise a great point about the biochemistry of ET's. I think it's these differences that really determine why SETI won't find anything unless those ET's are actively searching for us. We are listening for signals from advanced civilizations using 21st century signal processing and digital communication methods. Their auditory systems may not work the same way ours do and we could be shoveling sh*t against the tide.
The technology issue is also big here. We are currently using contemporary digital filtering and Fourier Spectrum analysis (http://www.dadisp.com/ab23sol.htm) to look for far more advanced signals than we can at this point imagine. Fourier analysis is no longer the leading edge of DSP research (James Kaiser once said "The most widely used signal processing tool is the FFT, the most widely misused signal processing tool is also the FFT)."). There are many new algorithms used for frequency and other domain processing that have yielded amazing breakthroughs (Wavelets and their role in image compression for example) and there are others yet to be discovered. ET's would probably have the one-up on us with this technology and would/should not expect to transmit such signals and expect someone less advanced to hear it. Maybe they would use a primitive communication scheme (FM?) but even then as I mentioned before, if their auditory systems are totally different from ours, they could try their best in an initial contact signal, but there is no guarantee that we could detect it. However, I would think any FM signal would stand out from all that cosmic back-ground noise in the bands we're listening to, so maybe it can work, but only if they initiate the contact and "lower their standards" to our level of technological sophistication.
I think ET's will find us before we find them. SETI is a great attempt and we're doing the best we know. However, we are still a very primitive civilization and have a long way to go before we can actively seek out other civilizations through our communications systems.
"Jurassic Park IV was right about 'raptors' "
Jurassic Park had the right ideas about "raptor" dinosaurs - they were big, they were bad, and they were Grand Chess Masters...
I don't think this sort of technology will replace soldiers right out. However, it can be a great help in certain situations where you don't want to risk soldiers lives. EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) currently use robots to take out mines, IED's etc. These are different in the sense that they are remote controlled by well trained individuals. I see being able to negotiate urban obstacles in overly hostile environments to be a huge advantage especially if they are entirely autonomous. You can then send in robotic vehicles into riskier situations without the concern for loss of human life.
However, the ability to plan and conduct such operations and being able to assess a real combat situation is well beyond current technology. Then you have the whole realm of tactics and strategy, better strategy can allow for huge gains in the battle field, but would we want to leave that to robots? Over-reliance on technology to do humans jobs is a bad thing, and this is definitely a good example of that. I really don't see us ever eliminating the need for "boots on the ground", only maybe enhancing their abilities on the battlefield.
"The creationist zealots will likely take this bit of news, and embrace it as evidence that the scientific community is trying to be deceitful by withdrawing a "clearly correct" paper, for political reasons."
Sounds like this guy has already done what you're proposing they'll do:
"Vance Ferrell, who said he put together the material posted on Evolution-facts.org, said if the paper had been retracted he would remove the reference to it. Mr. Ferrell said he had no way of knowing what motivated Dr. Jacobson, but said that if scientists "look like they are pro-creationist they can get into trouble.""
Seems no matter what logical steps one takes to bring the truth to light, there will be someone else turning it around for their own interests.
If the hackers had released the info on the plantet, the scientists could have simply said there was no planet, just a high altitude weather balloon!!!
I guess this may be the actual object the world was looking for originally. Clyde Tombaugh originally discovered it looking for planet x. Planet X was supposed to be the object that accounted for the odd gravitational effects that disrupted Neptune's orbit. He found pluto kind of by accident (and Pluto never accounted for the gravity problem). I wonder if further investigation will show that this object has the gravitational influence that affect Neptune's orbit? If so, this discovery is not only big because of the distance and size of the object, but the great mystery it may solve. Good job to the guys who found this!!!
I know myself that if I'm out of town on business or wherever, it's a great thing to be able to walk into a place and buy a coffee and some fat kid food and do some work or check email. It gives me a degree of freedom that wasn't available earlier. Right there, WiFi access keeps me coming in. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't spend as much time there and not eat as much fat kid food!
I can see it being an impressive feat recording every show of every channel for a month, that takes a decent amount of hardware. But, I guess the real question is, why? Seems like it's a bit overkill for me at least. Besides, the best archive one can have without all the bandwidth or hard drives included is the library! Read a book instead!
Slashdot Mirror
Those are not moons, they're space stations!
I really think the best bet is to have smart machines go in and do the really dangerous stuff that could kill a lot of humans. The EOD guys use robots to disable IED's and landmines now, and it has saved many of their lives for sure. As long as there is someone monitoring what those autonomous systems are up to, then "intelligent" decisions can be made by soldiers in the battlefield on how best to use these great resources.
I don't honestly ever see us relying entirely on autonomous systems to do the hard work of planning, coordinating, and executing battle operations. They'll probably fall under helping humans execute a battle plan in some capacity. There is a human element to strategy that we just can't reciprocate with AI. Brilliant Generals with good instincts have helped pave the way for successful military campaigns. Human experience is irreplaceable.
That's no supernova, it's a space station!
Yeah, I agree, that's why I added this later in the post:
"However, I would think any FM signal would stand out from all that cosmic back-ground noise in the bands we're listening to, so maybe it can work, but only if they initiate the contact and "lower their standards" to our level of technological sophistication."
The other thing is we've assumed a certain band of frequencies more likely to be used due to low background noise. What if they don't even use the electromagnetic spectrum like we do (perhaps something like modulated gravity waves instead)? Or what if they use ends of the spectrum that we can't even sense due to primitive technology? If we don't have the technology to remotely sense the medium they're transmitting in, who knows what we've missed already?
You raise a great point about the biochemistry of ET's. I think it's these differences that really determine why SETI won't find anything unless those ET's are actively searching for us. We are listening for signals from advanced civilizations using 21st century signal processing and digital communication methods. Their auditory systems may not work the same way ours do and we could be shoveling sh*t against the tide.
The technology issue is also big here. We are currently using contemporary digital filtering and Fourier Spectrum analysis (http://www.dadisp.com/ab23sol.htm) to look for far more advanced signals than we can at this point imagine. Fourier analysis is no longer the leading edge of DSP research (James Kaiser once said "The most widely used signal processing tool is the FFT, the most widely misused signal processing tool is also the FFT)."). There are many new algorithms used for frequency and other domain processing that have yielded amazing breakthroughs (Wavelets and their role in image compression for example) and there are others yet to be discovered. ET's would probably have the one-up on us with this technology and would/should not expect to transmit such signals and expect someone less advanced to hear it. Maybe they would use a primitive communication scheme (FM?) but even then as I mentioned before, if their auditory systems are totally different from ours, they could try their best in an initial contact signal, but there is no guarantee that we could detect it. However, I would think any FM signal would stand out from all that cosmic back-ground noise in the bands we're listening to, so maybe it can work, but only if they initiate the contact and "lower their standards" to our level of technological sophistication.
I think ET's will find us before we find them. SETI is a great attempt and we're doing the best we know. However, we are still a very primitive civilization and have a long way to go before we can actively seek out other civilizations through our communications systems.
"Jurassic Park IV was right about 'raptors' " Jurassic Park had the right ideas about "raptor" dinosaurs - they were big, they were bad, and they were Grand Chess Masters...
I don't think this sort of technology will replace soldiers right out. However, it can be
a great help in certain situations where you don't want to risk soldiers lives. EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) currently use robots to take out mines, IED's etc. These are different in the sense that they are remote controlled by well trained individuals.
I see being able to negotiate urban obstacles in overly hostile environments to be a huge advantage especially if they are entirely autonomous. You can then send in robotic vehicles into riskier situations without the concern for loss of human life.
However, the ability to plan and conduct such operations and being able to assess a real combat situation
is well beyond current technology. Then you have the whole realm of tactics and strategy, better strategy can allow for huge gains in the battle field, but would we want to leave that to robots? Over-reliance on technology to do humans jobs is a bad thing, and this is definitely a good example of that. I really don't see us ever eliminating the need for "boots on the ground", only maybe enhancing their abilities on the battlefield.
"The creationist zealots will likely take this bit of news, and embrace it as evidence that the scientific community is trying to be deceitful by withdrawing a "clearly correct" paper, for political reasons."
Sounds like this guy has already done what you're proposing they'll do:
"Vance Ferrell, who said he put together the material posted on Evolution-facts.org, said if the paper had been retracted he would remove the reference to it. Mr. Ferrell said he had no way of knowing what motivated Dr. Jacobson, but said that if scientists "look like they are pro-creationist they can get into trouble.""
Seems no matter what logical steps one takes to bring the truth to light, there will be someone else turning it around for their own interests.
If the hackers had released the info on the plantet, the scientists could have simply said there was no planet, just a high altitude weather balloon!!!
I guess this may be the actual object the world was looking for originally. Clyde Tombaugh originally discovered it looking for planet x. Planet X was supposed to be the object that accounted for the odd gravitational effects that disrupted Neptune's orbit. He found pluto kind of by accident (and Pluto never accounted for the gravity problem). I wonder if further investigation will show that this object has the gravitational influence that affect Neptune's orbit? If so, this discovery is not only big because of the distance and size of the object, but the great mystery it may solve. Good job to the guys who found this!!!
I know myself that if I'm out of town on business or wherever, it's a great thing to be able to walk into a place and buy a coffee and some fat kid food and do some work or check email. It gives me a degree of freedom that wasn't available earlier. Right there, WiFi access keeps me coming in. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't spend as much time there and not eat as much fat kid food!
I can see it being an impressive feat recording every show of every channel for a month, that takes a decent amount of hardware. But, I guess the real question is, why? Seems like it's a bit overkill for me at least. Besides, the best archive one can have without all the bandwidth or hard drives included is the library! Read a book instead!
Seems to me that all this thing has to offer is cute skins (that you can get anywhere for free now) and less control of your own hardware (see http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/07/15/155 216&tid=109&tid=172&tid=158&tid=155
). I'm not sold on it.