[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



Why do most science fiction settings stay so low on the Kardashev scale? It's rare to see a civilization that isn't a precursor that even rises above a Type 1 on the scale. Where's the Dyson Spheres, and ringworlds? Where are the warships that swallow suns to power their weapons? Where are the massive construction platforms that take nebula gas and form entire habitable solar systems with it?
>>
>>66734960

Difficulty to portray such a society.
>>
>>66734960
Very few science fiction authors have the education and intellect to portray such a society accurately and even few have the ability or desire to communicate it in a narrative format non-peers can understand.
>>
When a society reaches that scale of power they would be almost entirely unrecognizable. Organized human civilization is less than 50k years old. We likely won't see type II civilization within the next 50k years. Type III is to massively powerful to be nearly unimaginable.

It is like trying to describe modern society to an early hunter gatherer. At best he will only grasp the vaguest of concepts.
>>
>>66734960
Largely because, even soft sci-fi, is still bounded by the precepts of hard sci-fi.
A high Kardashev civ would, necessarily, have uncovered things about physics that fly in the face of what we consider contemporary science. This begs the question: how do you convey the fact that we are, despite all our advancements, as cavemen fiddling around with sticks and flint as compared to those hyper-advanced civilizations?
>>
>>66735072
Imagine explaining supermarkets to a caveman
>>
Because once you start showing what they can do it rapidly becomes fantasy from our perspective thanks to Clarke's third law.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
>>
>>66735357
Not necessarily. They might have supremely complex engineering and sophisticated science, but nothing about a Type II Dyson sphere (or a population of uploaded minds running inside it) requires fundamentally new physics.
>>
>>66736054
Maybe, but it certainly does provide the civ with the opportunity to discover fundamentally new physics. With access to tremendous energy outputs, undiscovered materials, and unexplored locations, they would likely discover something which presently eludes us.
More importantly, why would we assume that they would remain on the same level? Even if it's only to the degree that Einstein disproved Newton, the latter of whom's theories were enough to get men to the moon, that is not an insubstantial discrepancy. It's illogical to assume that we will not ourselves be proven wrong about our precepts governing the universe, in contradiction to how our forebears were proven wrong by those who came after.
>>
>>66735926
Or maybe more accurately, imagine a caveman trying to imagine a supermarket and then explain it to his peers.
>>
>>66734960
Are these alien civilizations supposed to build Dyson spheres just because they can? And maybe they can't. Maybe no one will ever build a Dyson sphere, ever, because it's pointless. It's like judging a civilization for not building pyramids.
When I read about some civilization in some novel series that seems purposely designed to be higher up on some meaningless metric than the other popular sci-fi civilizations out there, it just sounds boring to me.
I don't care that your pretend people have conquered the omniverse and wrapped galaxy clusters in constructs. That doesn't make it a good story. You don't win some award for coming up with the most powerful hypothetical beings.
The Force Awakens had a weapon that swallowed a sun. It was retarded.
>>
>>66735978
What a tired aphorism.
>>
>>66735978
This quote gets slung around a lot and think people miss the point. Clarke's not talking about fantasy tropes magic, he's just using it as a catch-all term for seemingly miraculous technology. You can have highly advanced post-scarcity nonsense technology and still present it in a way that doesn't equate to "dude magic bro".
>>
>>66736364
Still true.
>>
>>66736205
>Maybe no one will ever build a Dyson sphere, ever, because it's pointless
>having the power of an entire sun is pointless
>>
>>66737546
If you have the capability to build a dyson sphere, then how much do you really need one?
>>
>>66737724
>If you have the capability to dam a river, aren't you technologically advanced enough not to need hydroelectricity?
>>
>>66734960
There's a horizon beyond which we can't even speculate meaningfully. So your civ can build a Dyson sphere - okay! Now what do they want? What challenges them? What is their culture, religion, government like? What kind of things will their adventurers do, that we can base a meaningful campaign around?
Ultimately we end up amswering these questions arbitrarily, in a way that's really just about modern humans. In some fairness you can argue all sci fi is about us, but at least the stuff that sticks to a forseeable future (doesn't have to be literally correct, just plausible or coherent) has an internal discipline that super-far future, speculation required settjng building doesn't have.
Mindjammer attempted.this (and if you don't know it you should check it oit OP), but I foumd it ultimately unsatisfying. It's got transhumanism and personality uploads and fast FTL and underneath all that it's really just bbout modern humans doing the kinds of things modern humams do, with better tech. There's less actual psychological sci fi tham in a more grounded mear future sci fi setting.
>>
>>66737724

You don't purposely build one. You build one over millennia of growth. Still, If you wanted to speed up things, it's theoretically possible to build a partial and simple one (strip-mining Mercury into dust) over 50 years taking advantage of automation and exponential growth.
>>
>>66737976
May I recommend the Culture series, if you haven't read the books already?
>>
>>66736149

It is likely that we will reach a point of stagnation where no future discoveries are possible without building Megastructures. Gravitons, if real, are impossible to be discovered without particle accelerators that would dwarf anything we could build on Earth. In effect, we will or already have exhausted all the low-hanging fruits.
>>
>>66734960

Most spaceborn civilisations in fictions are extremely young and writers keep failing to get the sense of scale.
>>
>>66734960
bad stories
>>
>>66738047
I read one and didn't grt into it. But I'll give it another shot if I ever get more free time.
>>
What do you think of how societies and technology is portrayed in the Revelation Space series?
>>
>>66738298
Just get past the first book. It's leaps and bounds more entertaining past that.
>>
>>66738060
Not only is that an incredibly arrogant point of view which is wholly unsupported, but it's also at odds with the thread's premise.
Higher Kardashev civilizations would by definition have access to megastructures of a colossal scale. The OP even makes explicit reference to Dyson Spheres.
>>
>>66734960
Does the Finns-Korean Hyperwar count?
>>
Why do you guys talk about make believe dyson sphere crap like its even remotely possible. I like scifi that has relatable characters and settings. You might as well go jerk off to the infinity gauntlet or something.
>>
>>66738571
Based
>>66740221
Dyson swarm (not sphere) is possible but impossible to write interesting scifi about, as others have said in this thread. Interesting scifi has to be contrived low tech - for example, even the most basic level of human genetic engineering, genetic tech that's foreseeable in our lifetimes, allows you to eliminate genetic load and make everyone into an athletic super-handsome super-genius who lives to the age of 180. Good luck characterizing that.
>>
File: file.png (244 KB, 600x447)
244 KB
244 KB PNG
>>66738060
>In effect, we will or already have exhausted all the low-hanging fruits
Nonsense, current low hanging fruit is
>biological augmentation. Eliminate genetic load and you've just maxxed your eugenics level in one step. Everyone now has 200IQ and is unbelievably athletic and good looking.
>Graphene materials - hundreds of times stronger than steel
>Beamed energy propulsion: this will power commercial surface-to-orbit
The first one will change humanity beyond anything a scifi author can reasonably imagine, long before we start building megastructures.
>>
File: med_matrioshka_brain.png (308 KB, 600x397)
308 KB
308 KB PNG
>>66734960
>Why do most science fiction settings stay so low on the Kardashev scale?
Mostly because authors try to write about human characters and superintelligent posthumans that built such megacivilization are hard to write and only interesting to a niche group of readers.
>>
>>66734960
Think. Your PCs are already hard enough to keep on a leash in a fantasy game.
>>
>>66734960
What kinds of stories can you even tell about such a civilization? Yeah the scales are interesting to hear about, but such a society is, by its nature, lacking in conflict. A Dyson swarm might have ideological conflicts, but they won't be shooting each other over resources. Any interspecies conflicts would be either so fast and deadly nobody would notice what was happening until they were dead, or so slow that that it would be generations between salvos. What conflict could uploaded digital minds with freedom to write and rewrite their perceived reality even have?

Basically, even if a writer was able to accurately capture the kind of civilization that is that far up the scale, such a civilization isn't very interesting outside of describing it.

The only story that comes close that I'm aware of is The Culture, and the conflicts in that setting are specifically because of some illogical anachronisms and extreme edge case scenarios arising from them
>>
>>66738047
The Culture is, of anything, even more about his complaints.
They have infinite energy and AIs that do everything for them, but fundamentally they still act like people from around now. Hell, even the hyper intelligent AIs still act like people, complete with sarcastic quips. Banks didn't tackle imagining their society any more than "super hedonistic, I guess?"

I do love The Culture books. They all read like a really awesome and imaginative action movie set in the far future. But they aren't hard sci fi, and they don't really explore the society they're set in.
>>
>>66742402
Greg Egan sometimes write about civilisations on this scale and they can be pretty fun:
http://www.gregegan.net/INCANDESCENCE/00/Crocodile.html
>>
>>66734960
Because that shit is ridiculous and requires unrealistic amounts of resources to construct.
>>
>>66742402
Try the Count to the Eschaton books. It's mostly Type I, but scales up fast at the end, and there's no FTL woo or Culture neoliberalism.
>>
>>66738047
I didn't like the Culture. What Banks did was create a... Well, culture that had reached a civilizational dead end and was now just existing, assimilating others into it's dead end culture of hedonism and revelry which reminded me of the Overlords from Childhood's End. But that's my beef with the setting. My real problem with Banks is his disinterest in the society that he created (save for extramarital magical realm shit), instead writing parables for 'western' interventionism in primitive societies and whether or not it was moral and ethical.
>>
>>66742627
>aircraft carriers are unrealistic to the Roman Empire

It's physically possible unlike hyperdrives and Trek aliens.
>>
>>66734960
Unironically Star Wars.
>>
>>66735072
>When a society reaches that scale of power they would be almost entirely unrecognizable.
People are still going to love, hate, desire, and fall victim to silver-tongued megalomaniacs tag-teaming with the evil in their own hearts. These things won't change, whether the people in question are meatbags in tin cans, ascended superintelligencies the size of galaxies, teleological threads in a hive mind or self-aware memetic complexes living in the collective consciousness of younger races. The stage might change, but the actors stay the same.

>We likely won't see type II civilization within the next 50k years.
I don't think you really understand how far we've come in the last few years, or how powerful compound interest - exponential growth. really is. We could start building a Dyson Sphere right now. Barring astronomically bad luck the only thing that can stop us from taking the Sol system in our lifetimes is ourselves, either through personal self-destructiveness or climate changing our civilization into collapse.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pP44EPBMb8A&t=469s
>>
>>66734960
Alastair Reynolds wrote a book caller Revenger in a decaying one. It's not the best but has a nice age of sail feel by rigging solar sails to navigate an archipelago of worlds.
>>
>>66737843
Very much not the same thing. In the process of building a dyson sphere, it's been estimated that you'd need more resources that a single solar system could provide; your have to import them from others.
In the process of damming a river your don't destroy all of the surrounding area.
>>
>>66744722
Not even Nicol Dyson said you should build a solid sphere. We're talking about a dense cloud of satellites and habitats when we discuss dyson spheres (more accurately, swarm). Dismantling a couple planets would be enough raw materials to get started and you can starlift the rest using that.
>>
>>66744722
>In the process of damming a river your don't destroy all of the surrounding area.
Are you well? Do you have brain damage?
>>
File: bot spider.jpg (70 KB, 900x621)
70 KB
70 KB JPG
>>66744722
You could cut a lot of resources by lifting the necessary elements from the star itself. You first use the nearest planets/satellites/asteroids to built up a necessary infrastructure then you could ramscoop the additional material. The bigger you built the swarm the more control you have over the star until you can magnetically "squeeze" material out of it.
>>
>>66744239
I've been eyeing this one at the bookstore for a while now.
>>
>>66734960
Because it's hard and the audience appeal is limited.
>>
>>66735072
>>66735926
>>66736191
Me put food in cold box.
>You am going too far! You play gods!
Me am gods.
>>
>>66735000
Wasting trips on posh words you didn’t need, cunt.
>>
>>66734960
Because the scale isn't remotely realistic anyway.
>>
>>66746830
Whereas in nine words you convey so much incel.
>>
File: 1511724173298.jpg (42 KB, 446x559)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>66742513
>They have infinite energy and AIs that do everything for them, but fundamentally they still act like people from around now.

I, and probably most people I know, would have almost nothing in common with someone on a Culture Orbital. For one, they don't seem to have any real regard for the sanctity of life. There is no point at which the Culture makes any allusion to the rights of the unborn, or the rights of animals. Instead it's the opposite, the drone from Player of Games butchers a pet for fun at a party and the exile character from Excession keeps her unborn child in stasis for 40 years over some slight with another person. And don't even start with the shenanigans they do with cloning. Their whole society is like the logical endpoint of postmodernism, where nothing is valuable and any form of social structure is just an obstacle to your own pleasure.

I don't blame the Idirans for trying to destroy them. They have more in common with the Pre-Fall Eldar than with Earth.
>>
File: OA-Milky-Way-map-v3.jpg (637 KB, 1464x1560)
637 KB
637 KB JPG
>>66734960
What's your favorite sci-fi setting/work that has a high Kardashev scale? Mine would be Orion's Arm.
>>
>>66747940
Funny choice of invective, I thought you were a fedora.
>>
>>66740927
How would you include civilizations like that and still have human characters then? Penal colonies with enforced tech levels?
>>
File: 232702197.jpg (602 KB, 1920x1200)
602 KB
602 KB JPG
>>66747972
I think the best way of going about it is to mix civilizations that embrace traditional values with high tech and civilizations that embrace progressive values with their high tech. And because these societies are so different in values they find each other to be absolutely horrifying, and take little issue with dehumanizing and warring with each other.
>>
>>66748292
The Culture
>>
>>66734960
Orion's Arm. John C. Wright's Eschaton Sequence. Thank me later.
>>
>>66734960
Too much magic bullshit makes it hard/impossible to have reasonable challenges. It makes it boring. See: The Culture novels.
>>
>>66748292
A Fire Upon the Deep.
>>
>>66735926
>>66736191
Imagine trying to explain the globe spanning networks that make a supermarket possible to a caveman.
Hell, imagine trying to explain just the things that make a supermarket meat aisle possible to a caveman.
>>
>>66750734
Try explaining how anything works to someone today. How many people even know why ice is slippery?
>>
>>66751085
>How many people even know why ice is slippery?
This isn't really a useful measure. Lots of people don't understand why ice is slippery, or how to calculate income taxes, or how a car engine works, but most of them have a background level of knowledge to where you could teach them these things in relatively short order. Most people have a general idea of what atoms are, how math works, and even if they can't give you the terms have a functioning understanding of basic thermodynamics.

The supermarket analogy is a good one because the caveman doesn't have any of these things. Not only does he not understand how the box keeps meat cold, he doesn't understand the many basic things you would need him to understand before you could even explain the magic of refrigeration to him (such as the very concept of heat as energy) and likely he doesn't even understand the basics he'd need for you to explain THOSE things to him either. Modern public education systems are garbage, but they are not totally and completely ineffective and modern first world children learn lots of things through cultural osmosis.
>>
>>66734960
>DC
>Marvel
>Star Trek
UH GUH SO OBSCURE WHY NO POPULAR WORKS GO HIGH ON THE SCALE
>>
File: Guardians vs Magic.jpg (324 KB, 750x549)
324 KB
324 KB JPG
>>66734960
Reminder that the Maltusians are so high up on the scale they could bitch slap the Xelee, Downstreamers, Culture, Photino Birds, all those bland bastards.
>>
>>66751822
>lock up magic
great, so they're timelord tier
except their time travel is shit so they're below that
and downstreamers > timelords, so yeah nah
>>
>>66751845
>Lock up DC magic
>The kind that comes from a supernal plane around the multiverse
>The kind that God himself uses
>Pfffff no big deal
Oh child...
>>
>>66743610
>the actors stay the same

Do you have any way to remotely back this up. Humans are made of meat. Anything made of different meats or made of metal or made of some more exotic bits wouldnt think or act anything like humans do now
>>
>>66751845
>Their time travel is shit
Lol wat? Time travel is a bitch basic lantern skill.
>>
>>66751822
>>66751845
>1 Smurf alone was enough to BTFO the Marvel universe and turn Galctus into his personal castle
>1 Smurf --accidentally-- created an infinite multiverse
>2 Smurfs BTFO the Anti-Monitor who ate an infinite universe
>They're connected throughout the multiverse to other GLCs
>Lanterns create a universe as part of basic training
>Fucked all magic not on Earth into submissiona
>Weaponized the chakras a living multiverse
The Smurfs would fuck the Time Lords and Downstreamers into submission and create Time Lord and Downstreamer themed batteries to farm to other races.
>>
Doctor Who is technically someone from a Type IV civ slumming it around the lower orders, but they rarely make an effort to even try to be proper sci fi. It's forgivable that the high tier aliens can pull any shit they want but some nods to proper science plausibility would be nice. The early episodes of nu-who like "The empty child" did manage to do it
>>
File: Seven Soldiers Strike.jpg (106 KB, 503x571)
106 KB
106 KB JPG
>>66751845
>Implying Timelords could handle DC magic
>>
>>66751949
... So literally nothing impressive to the Downstreamers and Dr. Who. Gotcha, senpai.
>>
>>66752025
If you say so senpai.

Reminder their footsoldiers stabbed a Monitor vampire from beyond Limbo to death.
>>
>>66752025
Timelords got slaughtered by walking coffee pots. They aren't shit. Krona alone solos them. Downstreamers take more work, but Hal gets them in the end. They're limited by the different universal constraints that assume while lantern energy transcends constraints.
>>
File: Beyonders.jpg (69 KB, 572x390)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
>>66752025
How do the Beyonders fare?
>>
>>66752098
Beyonders were a joke that got killed by physical force and couldn't figure out how linear time worked. Anyone with decent time travel kills them.
>>
>>66747940
Fie and folly! I can excede your halfwits with only two, simple words. Behold:
DOUBLE NIGGER.
>>
File: 1349389396902.jpg (42 KB, 640x480)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>66750140
Because even if we can bend the laws of physics to our whims, people are still people. Instead of striving for physical resources, people strive for social resources, for personal meaning, or enlightenment.
>>
>>66751085
Supermarked is weird because even a normie sorta gets the ideas if its presented in a non arcane fashion.
Meanwhile Caveman will go WTF
as soon as
>Fiat money for a institution that won't exist until there is a population base for it. AT LOW LEVEL TRADE
>The logistic nightmare of it
>The fact that Supermarkeds barely contain a week of food at most, despite being huge
>Wage specialization, which has only been around for one and a half century at this point
>>
>>66752098
Beyonders only get by because canonically they're anti-whatever that word that's not forming in my head to describe the gods and conceptual shit they have a good matchup with. They're basically kryptonite to those guys so they still get bodied by those like timelords, daleks and downstreamers
>>
>>66752080
Those walking coffee pots were universe busters before the big final timewar happened and only became a threat due to multiple blunders by the doctor
>>
>>66734960
Superluminary by John C. Wright.
>>
>>66751354
>>66753757

So a "caveman" is basically a child. You just have to start from the beginning.

Unless we're assuming they have the IQ of the aboriginals, in which case there's no hope of any complex understanding of anything except huffing gasoline.
>>
>>66754125
This. They got bitched by Dr. Doom turning their Molecule Man bombs against them and they didn't see it coming.

They literally got hoisted by their own petards. That's absolutely clownshoes when discussing high-level cosmic shit. Booster Gold could probably hand them their gray asses.
>>
>>66752002
>>66751949
>1 Smurf alone was enough to BTFO the Marvel universe and turn Galctus into his personal castle

The G is an overhyped entity. He’s not a casual universe ender and as such frankly is irrelivent in comparison to the forces being discussed here. The doctor’s old rust bucket model t of a tardis is a universe ender in it’s own right.

>Smurfs BTFO the Anti-Monitor who ate an infinite universe

Anti-moniter’s power is innately variable. the real threat isn't just how powerful the Anti-Monitor is at any given time. It's how powerful he could be plus the whole "can create attacks that annihilate anything upon contact" part. This explains how he can take a beating from Supergirl in one scene and then barely flinch at DC's actual top dog entities at a later point or even 1 vs everything for the fate of the multiverse. I mean I know your a clever lad and bloody well know this...but I know that you are just being intentionally dishonest.

>1 Smurf --accidentally-- created an infinite multiverse.

I’m unfamiliar with this exact instance.

>Lanterns create a universe as part of basic training.

1. No they don’t and 2. Time lords do such things with casual ease.

>Fucked all magic not on Earth into submissiona
>Weaponized the chakras a living multiverse.

I don’t know what kind of wack you are on but you are plainly wrong. I’m a comi-taku tier comics faggot and I’m telling you plain that you are a fucking dipshit.
>>
>>66750140
At the fringes human-like character will exist, untrusting of these superintelligences, ever fleeing from them. Or you are born as a to be a creative resource for one of the vast intellects that reign the stars, main purpose of your existence is to create a new autosentient mind and grow different from what was before. This latter take could take on nearly any form from utopian societies to dystopic ones, all created for you to grow.
>>
>>66753720
> people are still people
If humanity goes full posthuman that won't be the case. Autosentient superintelligences think different.
>>
>>66734960
Because the "Kardaschev scale" is ridiculously disproportionate, with very 'step' being a mind bogglingly insane leap up from the last. Straight from Star to Galaxy? Are you kidding me?
Straight from Galaxy to UNIVERSE? What fucking insanity is the point of this scale? Each unit is worthless!
>>
>>66756576
thank you, i wanted to post the same thing. Log scales have their uses, but not as civilisation developement index.

In kardashev scale, our civilisation, random STL aliens that colonised dozen systems in their neighbourhood, and star trek (FTL and few hundred starstems) are pretty much the same thing.

At the same time, non-expanding civilisation with dyson swarm around their sun counts as higher than one that spread through hundred systems using stl probes, but has not bothered with megastructure engineering. .
>>
>>66750734
>>66735926
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eafOkWXjqjc

This comes pretty close.

>>66756576

It makes kind of sense, reach + power available. Planet, Star, Galaxy, universe.

We're scratching 1 because we can move freely within our planet, next step, moving freely along our Solar System lets us build a dyson sphere. If we can move between stars then we have a galaxy on lockdown within a short timespan, galactically speaking. And so on.
>>
>>66756552
Prove it noob.
>>
>>66756994
Autosentience is the ability to be totally conscious of oneself. There is no unconsciousness, you are in total control of yourself. Such hyperrational beings could act like humans but even our most disciplined humans merely control their mind, autosentient beings would be their mind. Problem is that each autosentient being has to re-articulate oneself so that he does not fall into solipsistic catatonia.

This is of course no scientific speculation, this at best philosophical speculation. Autosentient beings don't exist but even if they are impossible, mind augmentations will change who we are and how we think. The people of tomorrow will look alien to us, the joy of cognitive freedom.
>>
>>66735000
I bet you think you would understand such a book, and that you yourself are too intelligent to write a book

Go kys yourself
>>
>>66734960

Because RPGs are meant to be played and none of the things you describe seem like they'd present any unique situations or adventure ideas.

I mean, I guess you could play characters working on constructing a Dyson sphere, but when it comes right down to it, the play experience probably wouldn't be much different from building a space station or even just a large apartment building .
>>
>>66747972
Says a man who posts on 4chan
>>
boring
>>
>>66734960
because its boring, it just becomes the powerlevels from DBZ/Dies Irae but with even less humanity or reason to care
>>
>>66744722
You general DO destroy part the the area to make a dam, the flooded land the reservoir sits on top of.
>>
File: thrillho album cover.jpg (30 KB, 480x360)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
>>66756960
>even people in this isolated, backwater tribe know Michael Jackson

Damn. That's fucking nuts.
>>
>>66734960
The difficult in creating conflict that is both believable and understandable. Not to say it cant be done, but it requires more skill from the writer than at a more easily relatable scale.
>>
>>66740308
>athletic super-handsome super-genius who lives to the age of 180. Good luck characterizing that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUfXaF4g6lg
>>
>>66740308
Actually a solid non orbiting sphere is possible as well supported by particle accelerators or equivalent circling the star, and done at the correct distance you can then get 1G of gravity from the star on the outer surface, creating a shellworld that's absolutely massive. Artificial lighting required of course.
This requires a significant part of the stars output so probably not worth it except to show off.
>>
>>66758134
*4channel
>>
>>66756552
The fundamental urges remain the same
Sustenance
Reproduction
Art
Play
Spirituality
>>
>>66740308
>allows you to eliminate genetic load and make everyone into an athletic super-handsome super-genius who lives to the age of 180
That's a standard superhero setting and those were making billions right now.

>Good luck characterizing that.
Seeing how even comic books manage that just fine, maybe you just suck as a writer?
>>
>>66761230
Unless we go the Eclipse Phase root and start employing psychosurgery to ourselves.
You could then remove those urges, add new ones or modify their intensity. I think sustenance is the only necessary one a super transhumanist would care to keep
>>
>>66761230
Not really.
>>
>>66742402
>What conflict could uploaded digital minds with freedom to write and rewrite their perceived reality even have?
Person A and person B are dating. Person B and person C are also dating. Person A and person C find out about each other.
Person A creates something noteworthy. Person B claims credit for it, rightly or wrongly.
Person A is an overbearing parent. Person B is their adult child who must work up the courage to claim their independence.
Person A is a parent. Person B is their nearly adult child. Person A wants to take person B away from the swarm into a relatively or absolutely miserable and deprived existence for religious or ideological reasons. Person B wants to stay.
Person A is a transhumanist who wants to turn the swarm into an ascended superintelligent hive mind. Person B wants to stay and keep their world as they are.

And so on and so on.
>>
>>66751898
>Humans are made of meat. Anything made of different meats or made of metal or made of some more exotic bits wouldnt think or act anything like humans do now
Humans are made of meat, which is made of cells, which are made of molecules, which are made of atoms, which are made of nucleus which are made of hadrons which are made of quarks, and electrons, both of which are excitations in fundamental quantum fields dragged over spacetime according to current scientific understanding.
Now how far down did you follow before it became irrelevant? Are you actually aware of you individual cells? Would you stop being human if your heart was replaced with a mechanical pump? What if the sub-cellular "stack" was replaced with a physics simulator? What if the cells themselves were replaced by simulations?
Anything that comes after us will be designed by us to function in our culture. It will look like a human because it was made to fit into a human-shaped hole. No matter what the substrate, the big picture will have to be basically human to pass the filter of natural selection in a world dominated by humans. Thus, mankind as a biological species might end but human nature as a memetic complex won't.
>>
>>66757309
>Autosentience is the ability to be totally conscious of oneself. There is no unconsciousness, you are in total control of yourself.
I once achieved a state somewhat like this with LSD. To be specific, I could (kinda, vaguely) see how my thoughts were being formed as I thought them. The problem with that was, of course, that I couldn't actually do anything with that knowledge since that would require infinite processing power - there's the thought, the part of you watching it being formed, the part of you watching that part, the part of you watching... and so on ad recursive infinity.

So no, autosentience in the sense of being in total control is not possible. What might be possible would be to go over all your mental structures at will and perform analysis and self-reprogramming, or focusing a fraction of your attention directly to a problem and another fraction to the methods used to solve it in a supervisory role.

Also, please understand that even if by some clever way you could get by the infinite recursion problem, you'd still be seeing your own reasoning through the lens of your own interpretative framework - in other words, you own prejudices would still bind you unless you willfully questioned them, which you can do as is.

>hyperrational
Any set of facts can be made to fit any set of axioms if one is willing to complicate one's model enough. That's why heuristics like Occam's Razor exist. A superintelligence which considers the superiority of Stalinism to be central to its identity is always going to be able to excuse any and all evidence to the contrary, just like plenty of humans did.

The point being, "hyperrational" and "sane" are not the same thing.

>the joy of cognitive freedom
Based on above, it takes more than just ability to set you free.
>>
>>66761262
>You could then remove those urges, add new ones or modify their intensity.
You could. However, if you remove your urges, what drives you? You'll get outcompeted by people who kept theirs.

Remember, human urges are the result of 4 billion years of evolution, and evolution cares about nothing but success. You don't have empathy and sentimentality because empathy and sentimentality are nice but because beings who had empathy and sentimentality treaded over the rotting corpses of beings who didn't have them. Empathy and sentimentality exist and have power over you because they won their right to that in the most brutal Battle Royale that has ever been or ever will be. And the same goes for every single urge and emotion you have. Only a fool simply cuts them away.

>I think sustenance is the only necessary one a super transhumanist would care to keep
That transhumanist is basically turning themselves into a clever insect. They may or may not survive indefinitely, but they're not going to be important for the future because they've pretty much removed any reason they might be.
>>
>>66761904
>Thus, mankind as a biological species might end but human nature as a memetic complex won't.
It will strongly derivate though. Mankind is a ill-defined concept, if one names the elements that make a human human, one is always able to give an example of humans that don't fit the part. The first transhuman will be of low level and differ not much from human. Gene augments, cyborgs and nano-enhanced people will be people because what makes a person is sapience but the more they modificate their minds for increased intelligence, the more different they will grow. The only thing a super-intelligent, at light-speed fast thinking, autosentient posthuman will share with a baseline human will be consciousness.

Parallel to transhumans, sapient AI will emerge.
>It will look like a human because it was made to fit into a human-shaped hole.
AI will need bias to function, but the bias doesn’t necessarily have to be human. An AI's environment is not human and even if you base all its experience around human, this will not make it a human mind inside a metal chassis, it will always be non-human. Sapience will still make it a person though and through sophonce AI and human can meet each other.
An AI that can think abstractly enough, will necessarily be able to change its code, as this the only way it can reflect on its choice and modificate its behavior. It's easier for an AI to modificate its code because by its nature it can fully view its internal mental processes and make much more extensive and detailed revisions to its own programming but in the other it can also be harder because the mind of an AI hasn't its origin in the blind chaos of evolution, it is the product of human design and the codes from which it emerges cannot easily be managed as human instincts.
>>
File: 1559997704985.gif (1.86 MB, 400x197)
1.86 MB
1.86 MB GIF
>>66762656
>I once achieved a state somewhat like this with LSD.
I doubt that, /x/. Autosentience will be a bit more complicated than simply mushing up your brain. (No offense, I`m enjoying this conversation) You gonna have to increase neural connectivity by a thousandfold to create the potential for it, then you have to learn to use it and this is still a big unknown to us. Research into it will take centuries and each therapy will take decades. Autosentience will be the holy grail of mind augmentations, you don't need to be autosentient to differ from humans on a like we differ from apes. Slowly our ability to revize our thoughts will increase and just a slight increase of it means the world. This willfull questioning of oneself will be a necessary part to grow into autosentience.
>Any set of facts can be made to fit any set of axioms if one is willing to complicate one's model enough.
Autosentient super-intelligences won't be holy men, they will still be people but they will be very unlike baseline humans. They won't be able to Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem on its own terms. A autosentient mind won't be taken by emotions as it is its emotions stuff like Stalinism or other localities will only used by a autosentient mind if it sees a benefit from it.

I must confess hyperrational was a hyperbole of mine. I tend to dramatize the things.
>Based on above, it takes more than just ability to set you free.
Absolutly, I specualte that one has to rearticualte one's own mind to become autosentient and this rearticulization will make each autosentient mind its own being, different from each other. There will still be clusters but the natural bias and instincts will be gone but not lost.
>>
>>66763073
>However, if you remove your urges, what drives you?
The new urges you programmed, these new urges will still be of human origin but derivate more and more.
>You'll get outcompeted by people who kept theirs.
Depends, having understood your mind and optimized it for modern times can be a great boon for oneself.
>>
File: city.jpg (61 KB, 648x405)
61 KB
61 KB JPG
>>
>>66765376
If the City wouldn't have anti gravity tech, what would happen to such solid dyson ball? Collapse into a massive black hole?
>>
>>66761262
Please propose an alternative fundamental urge. I suppose you could extract nurturing from reproduction--people find intrinsic value in caring for plants and animals. But by that measure, it's arguably not a "new" urge, but the refinement of one.

>I think sustenance is the only necessary one a super transhumanist would care to keep
I think you've got it backwards.
Sustenance is the one people are most motivated to get rid of. Imagine how nice it would be if you were powered by fusion power, the casimir effect, or some other sci-fi handwavery instead of having to eat, drink, and sleep. As we solve or trivialize physical urges (sustenance & reproduction), the higher urges of art, play, and-most particularly-spirituality become more important.
This is one of the things I think Orion Arm gets right--the super advanced AI go balls deep into the Kabbalah.
>>
>>66766857
Not necessarily.
You can still use more mundane methods of active support, like using lasers to push against the sphere.
>>
>>66766857
It wouldn’t get built in the first place but yeah, and then a big chunk of the Galaxy would get fucked up as well.

Of course this all assumes the City isn’t a fucked up simulation in the first place.
>>
Final Shlock Mercenary book starts tomorrow.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.