Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Fermi's Paradox (Score 1) 349

In regards to your third point: the greatest evolutionary success on Earth, whether measured by pure numbers, biomass, or adaptability to drastic environmental change, is that of bacteria, not multicellular organisms. The reason is simple: it's generally an advantage to be just complex enough to self-replicate effectively and make reasonably efficient use of resources, but not too much more, as complexity is fragile.

There's a variation of your seventh point that's much more significant than the version you posted: sterilizer probes. Given accelerating expansion pushing us asymptotically towards de Sitter spacetime, within any Hubble volume, there is a finite amount of energy usable for work (in the physical sense of work, such as for maintaining life processes) for eternity. Different civilizations spreading throughout space that come to interact necessarily become competitors as long as they value their own even slightly more than the other. This would lead to an inevitable resource conflict on sufficiently large timescales because scarcity of the ultimate resource is inevitable. The ethical choice, then, is to send out self-replicating sterilizer probes to destroy all other intelligent life as early as possible before it has built up in numbers, since you'll be preventing the destruction of a much higher number of lives later on in a resource war. So, taking this argument (not mine; it's been around for quite a while), one can then simply apply a variation of the anthropic principle and say that the very chance you exist almost requires that there are no other civilizations that could have reached us by now, because any such would have with very high probability made you not exist.

Comment Re:"Industry desire" is all good and well (Score 1) 382

I don't know about ADCs, but just because a DAC accepts 24 bits doesn't mean it actually reaches the theoretical SNR for that level of quantization. The best audio DAC chips out there like the ones from ESS push maybe the equivalent of 22 (in the 20-20 kHz range, maybe a bit more in a narrower band due to noise shaping), and that's provided the following analogue circuits doing I/V and amplification are up to par. And for what? Your ears are limited to 120 dB dynamic range even at their most sensitive frequency band. Add to that the very limited availability of well-made 24-bit recordings, and t

Comment Re:Who cares if it ain't yours? (Score 1) 282

I'll make a reply to you that's analogous to what I responded with to GP when I pointed out that there's no dilution in terms of the actual unit subject to evolution, which is not the organism but the individual gene (in the sense of Dawkins' "selfish gene"). You're both looking at things at the wrong scale, and thus your arguments are specious. You're considering ideas and values as a curated collection forming the individual's worldview/belief system/etc. But this is not what it's about. Individual ideas and values can continue to propagate far, far longer than any of the ephemeral collections thereof that comprise an individual's mind.

Comment Re:Who cares if it ain't yours? (Score 1) 282

Such bullshit. While your genetic makeup as a specific collection of genes is diluted, evolution happens on the level of individual genes -- and these are not diluted but diffused, as they exist elsewhere throughout the population. You are a reproductive vessel for each of your genes, not the particular combination that comprises you as an individual organism. This very much validates the genetic argument against being a cuckold, because your derived purpose is to propagate as much as possible the particular alleles you carry.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is no statute of limitations on stupidity." -- Randomly produced by a computer program called Markov3.