Nostr Web Client

I would still think that there is no other way for us to make it in the long term than colonizing as many stars as possible, and that this requires transitioning from carbon-based self-replicating chemistry to an inorganic-based form of consciousness vessels that can withstand long-distance space travel.

In any case, it's quite possible that others have already done the same. We may be unable to find "life" in the universe, and that at the same time conscious beings are out there.

Low Information Voter 2y ago

Don't give up on carbon-based so easily - we have a solid lock on self-replication technology, and we're so cheap!

Develop your neural network in carbon over decades, then later "distil" its outputs into silicon-on-insulator for the long haul. We already have the technologies for that, we just don't call them by the right names.

What we don't have and should develop is the "technological toolkit" to colonise icy objects outside habitable zones. Probably needs to be fission-based since we cant seem to make fusion work. Building a society inside a KBO and putting it into an extrasolar trajectory is our only hope of teaching other stars without new physics.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Low Information Voter 2y ago

*reaching

hh 2y ago

That's pretty much what I'm thinking about, in the short term.

Be born in carbon-replicator form, then upload your ass to a silicon-binary form than can withstand gamma rays, extreme cold, enormous time lapses, and all that nasty crap that you need to endure in order to star-hop at sublight speeds.

But eventually, I think the whole "being born" thing ceases to make sense or just becomes impossible, and we just stick to inorganic, voluntarily or not.