Revista maxim
Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
2024.04.20 23:10 EternisedDragon Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
TL;DR 5-point argument: 1. Evolution of life unfolding on exoplanets (or any of the 200+ solar system ice moons) morally is a BIG DEAL. 2. Evolution can unfold in millions of very different ways. 3. The window between best and worst versions in terms of well-being or suffering to come from it surely is astronomically gigantic. 4. Any near-future microbial contamination of planets at most will lead to an abysmal version (and likely negative, for octillions - namely quintillions at any time for billions of years - of animals, since according to evolutionary biologists, wild animals mainly suffer on average). Conclusion: Even by current risk assessment response measures or standards applied in other cases, humanity must at the very least have discipline and hold itself back for many years from risking interplanetary and interstellar forward contamination, and so space ports must be locked down.
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Ethics subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to Ethics [link] [comments]
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Ethics subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
- Macro-Ethical Scale of Evolution of Life: Certainly, if evolution of life happens somewhere or not is a very big deal in (macro) ethical terms since easily millions of species can be subjected to it, be involved in it, for several hundreds of millions, possibly even billions of years.
- Macro-Ethical Importance of Evolution of Life: Now, what also is surely very agreeable is that evolution can play out in extremely many different ways and with extremely large variety in its short- and long-term dynamic, with that depending on all kinds of events (of various qualitatively different types) happening during it at all or not, or later or sooner. And so the window, or (in terms of all in the process aggregated joy and suffering) distance between the worst kinds of an instance of evolution of life and the best kinds of it surely is astronomically huge, providing the subject matter with monumental relevance, importance due to its scale. And this is independent of where (i.e. wholly on the negative side or between the negative and the positive side, or entirely on the positive side) such an interval or window consisting of the whole range or spectrum of cases of evolution of life between the worst and the best cases lies on any continuous axis (from - infinity to + infinity) meant to account for the ethical evaluation of the whole, once everything of ethical relevance related to it has finished happening.
- Nearly guaranteed expectable decision-making- or design-improvement, rapidly in short time: Also, certainly any randomly intentionally or accidentally, maybe even unnoticed, kind of initiated instance of evolution elsewhere would not with any sufficiently high likelihood result in a form of evolution of life that is anywhere close among whatever the better actually plausible possible cases of it may be. And at the same time, science and technologies progress rapidly and surely can keep progressing speedily for millennia, if not hundreds of thousands of years, putting humanity then into a position with far greater holistic overview and comprehension of the matter. And given how gargantuan of a macro-ethically important matter this is, even if in the future we only could turn it into e.g. a 5% (relative to the window width) better version than any now possibly as such then irreversible version of evolution of life, the absolute difference would be unimaginably titanic.
- Humanity's historical, contextually as empirical reference frame relevant, abysmal track record: As our history repeatedly shows, humanity does not have a track record of managing complex large-scale matters anywhere near perfectly right, the 1st time around, in part due to unaccounted for side-effects. Huge problems tied in with them are more the norm than an exception. And on top of this, unfortunately there is several factors that likely make it harder for contemporary people to care about this topic, such as all the crises we had and still have here on earth, but also that it's about a huge risk for others, not ourselves, and it'd not be humans (though it could also eventually lead to species with human level intelligence being subjected to it) but wildlife animals (which generally are by people judged to have a lower priority of care compared to other humans), and the disaster would unfold far in the future (long past the lifetime of anyone that lives currently) and far away, and the means by which it'd happen would be in a very subtle manner of which the comprehension, understanding of all that is made less accessible by the interdisciplinary complexity of the subject and that it has to be explained in rather little time, as it doesn't take long anymore for future space missions and activities in general carrying these grave risks with them. And so it seems that just about all odds stand in opposition rather than in favor of people taking it seriously with the right mindset about it.
- It holds true that there is lack of any urgency or need for near-future final decision-making, by which to lock humanity out of otherwise currently still available, significant alternatives.
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2024.02.27 23:59 djdefenda The Flawed Methodology in Aquaponics Manuscripts
The flawed methodology in many aquaponics manuscripts, particularly those that claim fish waste does not contain enough nutrients to support plant growth, stems from a misunderstanding or misapplication of the principles underlying aquaponics systems. This misconception is perpetuated by an echo chamber effect, where incorrect information is repeated and amplified within the community, often exacerbated by the Dunning-Kruger effect, where individuals with limited knowledge overestimate their understanding of a complex topic.
Integrated AquaVegeculture Systems (iAVs), developed by the iAVs Research Group, predates the popularization of aquaponics and represents a more efficient method of combining aquaculture and horticulture. iAVs utilizes sand as a biofilter and growing medium, which has been shown to effectively filter fish waste and provide a rich nutrient source for plant growth.
The shift from sand to gravel in aquaponics systems, by the Speraneos, driven by a desire to commercialize the original iAVs, resulted in systems that often require additional nutrient supplementation for optimal plant growth as well as extra system components, for example, when sand was substituted for gravel, the plants would dry out and so they were forced to design a bell syphon. iAVs was designed to be operated with minimal components, cost and maintenance without bell syphons or any extra filtration equipment.
The Speraneos attended a workshop by Dr. McMurtry but then changed the system to use gravel instead of sand. iAVs is free and open source but the Speraneos commercialized the changes so they could sell their plans.
The criticism of aquaponics research for not adequately comparing nutrient availability in fish waste to that required by plants overlooks the comprehensive work done on iAVs and the data provided.
McMurtry's research demonstrated that with proper system design and management, including the selection of appropriate fish feed, iAVs can supply all necessary nutrients for a wide range of vegetable crops without the need for external nutrient inputs.
This is in contrast to many aquaponics systems that fail to fully utilize the nutrients in fish waste, often due to inadequate biofiltration or the removal of solid waste, which contains significant amounts of essential nutrients.
However, most studies use inefficient mechanical filtration methods that remove the majority of solids or fail to fully utilize the nutrients in fish waste. Furthermore, many systems are operated at suboptimal pH levels for plant uptake and do not incorporate design elements to ensure adequate oxygenation for mineralization.
At higher pH levels, essential macronutrients such as phosphorus, iron, manganese, boron, copper and zinc precipitate out of solution and become unavailable for plant uptake. This can lead to deficiencies in these nutrients. Many micronutrients rely on carriers or chelators for uptake at higher pH levels. For example, iron is commonly bound to chelating agents to remain soluble. However, these bound forms tend to be less bioavailable to plants than nutrient ions. At pH 7 and above, the availability of potassium (K+), calcium (Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+) and other cations is reduced. This occurs because there is increased competition from hydrogen ions and hydroxide ions under alkaline conditions. High pH causes phosphorus to precipitate out with calcium and magnesium, forming insoluble compounds. This phosphorus becomes inaccessible for plant growth.
In the iAVs approach, the system is designed to buffer pH around 6.5, which is ideal for nutrient availability and removes the need to adjust pH. In the iAVs research, pH stabilzed at week 5. Below neutral pH, phosphorus is more available since there is less calcium and magnesium to bind with it. This enables efficient phosphorus nutrition. Trace elements like iron, manganese, zinc, and copper are more soluble in acidic conditions. This allows plants to take up greater quantities of these essential micronutrients. Mildly acidic pH may even create an unfavorable environment for certain pathogenic fungi and bacteria that can infect plant roots and leaves.
At a pH below 7, ammonia is predominantly in the form of ammonium (NH4+), which plants can directly uptake. Ammonium is a preferred nitrogen source for many plants because it requires less energy to assimilate compared to nitrate (NO3-). Plants can save metabolic energy when absorbing ammonium compared to nitrate because converting nitrate to ammonium (a form that can be incorporated into amino acids) requires energy. This energy saving can then be redirected towards growth and development.
Although some nitrifying bacteria are less active at lower pH, plants absorb nitrate more efficiently in slightly acidic conditions. Protonation of nitrate to HNO3 facilitates transport across membranes. The excess oxygen and the focus on heterotrophs more than compensates for the reduced nitrification at a lower pH.
The end result is the false notion that aquaponic systems are inherently deficient in essential nutrients like potassium, calcium and iron. This echoes through the literature, with authors citing previous flawed studies to support supplemental fertilization.
The iAVs utilizes reciprocating flood irrigation over sand beds to foster aerobic mineralization of solids and nutrient capture. Careful attention is paid to system pH and oxygen levels. As a result, the iAVs consistently demonstrates that fish waste can fully meet plant nutritional needs without supplementation, as demonstrated and proven in the iAVs research.
By comparing aquaponics to hydroponics, the importance of organic matter and the potential for direct uptake of certain organic compounds by plants may be overlooked. This can lead to underestimating the nutritional potential of aquaponics systems.
Hydroponic solutions provide nutrients in inorganic forms that are immediately available to plants. In contrast, organic nutrients often come in complex forms that require microbial activity to break down into assimilable nutrients. This process can affect the rate at which nutrients become available to plants.
Some plants can uptake certain amino acids, enzymes, lipids, and sugars directly from organic sources, potentially "saving" metabolic energy that can then be used for growth. This direct uptake is not replicated with inorganic nutrient solutions.
Understanding the unique dynamics of aquaponic systems is essential for optimizing plant nutrition and debunking misconceptions about nutrient availability.
Our long term troll, Steve, has been claimingfor years that fish feed does not contain enough nutrients and needs supplementation, but when he interviewed James Rakocy himself, it was Rakocy that said "With the recommended ratio (1:2) no solids are removed from the system. ...With this system, nutrient supplementation may not be necessary"
Recent studies challenge the long-held belief in Liebig's law of the minimum, which states that plant growth is limited by the scarcest nutrient resource. Instead, complex algorithms that consider interactions among nutrients suggest that plants can thrive even under perceived nutrient limitations. This new understanding supports observations that many plants grown organically, with seemingly fewer nutrients, can outperform those grown hydroponically in terms of yield and efficiency. This phenomenon could be attributed to the more efficient use of nutrients facilitated by organic growing methods, which include symbiotic relationships with soil microbes that enhance nutrient uptake.
Heterotrophs play a crucial role in making nutrients from fish waste more available and broken down in aquaponic systems, offering significant advantages over systems that rely predominantly on autotrophs. The flawed methodology in many aquaponics studies has highlighted an over-reliance on autotrophs, such as nitrifying bacteria, which convert ammonia to nitrate but do not fully address the breakdown and mineralization of organic matter. The optimal pH for heterotrophs is around 6, which is also the optimum pH for availability of nutrients for plants. A pH lower than 7 is also a buffer against ammonia spikes.
Furthermore, the narrative that iAVs was "stolen" and modified into what is now commonly known as aquaponics highlights the lack of recognition for McMurtry's pioneering work and the potential of iAVs as a sustainable food production method. The commercialization of aquaponics, while contributing to its spread, has also led to variations that do not fully capture the efficiency and sustainability of the original iAVs method.
Tragically, the pioneering work on the iAVs has been largely ignored by mainstream aquaponics researchers. The system was originally stolen and altered in ways that undermined its efficiency. For example, exchanging sand for gravel severely limits the capacity to mineralize and retain nutrients in the reactor beds. This "aquaponics" offshoot perpetuates the myth of inherent nutritional deficiencies.
In conclusion, the flawed methodology in aquaponics research and the misconceptions about nutrient availability from fish waste stem from a departure from the principles of iAVs.
A return to these principles, with a focus on optimizing the use of fish waste as a nutrient source through proper system design and management, could address many of the deficiencies observed in current aquaponics practices.
The aquaponics community needs to acknowledge the reality that flaws in their methodologies have led to incorrect conclusions about the potential of these integrated systems. Carefully designed, as in the iAVs, aquaponics can be a highly efficient and sustainable method of food production without costly supplemental inputs.
We owe it to the visionaries who pioneered this technology to apply the scientific method rigorously and learn from their groundbreaking work.
In conclusion, the flawed methodology prevalent in aquaponics research, particularly the underestimation of nutrient availability from fish waste, can be traced back to a departure from the foundational principles of Integrated AquaVegeculture Systems (iAVs). The pioneering work of Dr. McMurtry and the iAVs Research Group has demonstrated that with proper system design and management, fish waste can indeed provide a complete nutrient profile for plant growth, negating the need for external supplementation .
The list below is a sample of the manuscripts that have used or are based on a flawed methodology;
Verma, Ajit Kumar, et al. "Aquaponics as an integrated agri-aquaculture system (IAAS): Emerging trends and future prospects." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 194 (2023): 122709.
Yep, Brandon, and Youbin Zheng. "Aquaponic trends and challenges–A review." Journal of Cleaner Production 228 (2019): 1586-1599.
Medina, Miles, et al. "Assessing plant growth, water quality and economic effects from application of a plant-based aquafeed in a recirculating aquaponic system." Aquaculture international 24 (2016): 415-427.
Khater, E. G. "Aquaponics: the integration of fish and vegetable culture in recirculating systems." Benha, Egypt (2006).
Licamele, Jason David. "Biomass production and nutrient dynamics in an aquaponics system." (2009).
Goddek, Simon, et al. "Challenges of sustainable and commercial aquaponics." Sustainability 7.4 (2015): 4199-4224.
Yang, Teng, and Hye-Ji Kim. "Characterizing nutrient composition and concentration in tomato-, basil-, and lettuce-based aquaponic and hydroponic systems." Water 12.5 (2020): 1259.
Wortman, Sam E. "Crop physiological response to nutrient solution electrical conductivity and pH in an ebb-and-flow hydroponic system." Scientia Horticulturae 194 (2015): 34-42.
Romano, Nicholas, Shahidul Islam, and Hayden Fischer. "Ebb and flow versus constant water level on the sweet banana chili pepper (Capsicum annuum) production in an aquaponic system." Aquacultural Engineering 102 (2023): 102340.
Blanchard, Caroline, et al. "Effect of pH on cucumber growth and nutrient availability in a decoupled aquaponic system with minimal solids removal." Horticulturae 6.1 (2020): 10.
Van Ginkel, Steven W., Thomas Igou, and Yongsheng Chen. "Energy, water and nutrient impacts of California-grown vegetables compared to controlled environmental agriculture systems in Atlanta, GA." Resources, Conservation and Recycling 122 (2017): 319-325.
Yavuzcan Yildiz, Hijran, et al. "Fish welfare in aquaponic systems: its relation to water quality with an emphasis on feed and faeces—a review." Water 9.1 (2017): 13.
Derikvand, Peyman, et al. "Inoculum and pH Effects on Ammonium Removal and Microbial Community Dynamics in Aquaponics Systems." Available at SSRN 4441800.
Fruscella, Lorenzo, et al. "Investigating the effects of fish effluents as organic fertilisers on onion (Allium cepa) yield, soil nutrients, and soil microbiome." Scientia Horticulturae 321 (2023): 112297.
Delaide, Boris, et al. "Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. Sucrine) growth performance in complemented aquaponic solution outperforms hydroponics." Water 8.10 (2016): 467.
Chen, Peng, et al. "Maximizing nutrient recovery from aquaponics wastewater with autotrophic or heterotrophic management strategies." Bioresource Technology Reports 21 (2023): 101360.
Nozzi, Valentina, et al. "Nutrient management in aquaponics: comparison of three approaches for cultivating lettuce, mint and mushroom herb." Agronomy 8.3 (2018): 27.
Duarte, Eglerson, et al. "Nutrients in lettuce production in aquaponics with tilapia fish compared to that with hydroponics." Revista Caatinga 36 (2023): 21-32.
Bittsanszky, Andras, et al. "Nutrient supply of plants in aquaponic systems." Ecocycles 2.2 (2016): 17-20.
Tyson, Richard V., Danielle D. Treadwell, and Eric H. Simonne. "Opportunities and challenges to sustainability in aquaponic systems." HortTechnology 21.1 (2011): 6-13.
Tsoumalakou, Evangelia, et al. “Precise Monitoring of Lettuce Functional Responses to Minimal Nutrient Supplementation Identifies Aquaponic System’s Nutrient Limitations and Their Time-Course.” Agriculture (Basel)., 2022
Zhanga, Hong, et al. "Recovery of nutrients from fish sludge as liquid fertilizer to enhance sustainability of aquaponics: A review." CHEMICAL ENGINEERING 83 (2021).
Gebauer, Radek, et al. "Species-and diet-specific aquaculture wastewater nutrient profile: Implications for aquaponics and development of sustainable aquaponics diet." Aquaculture 568 (2023): 739307.
submitted by djdefenda to Sandponics [link] [comments]
Integrated AquaVegeculture Systems (iAVs), developed by the iAVs Research Group, predates the popularization of aquaponics and represents a more efficient method of combining aquaculture and horticulture. iAVs utilizes sand as a biofilter and growing medium, which has been shown to effectively filter fish waste and provide a rich nutrient source for plant growth.
The shift from sand to gravel in aquaponics systems, by the Speraneos, driven by a desire to commercialize the original iAVs, resulted in systems that often require additional nutrient supplementation for optimal plant growth as well as extra system components, for example, when sand was substituted for gravel, the plants would dry out and so they were forced to design a bell syphon. iAVs was designed to be operated with minimal components, cost and maintenance without bell syphons or any extra filtration equipment.
The Speraneos attended a workshop by Dr. McMurtry but then changed the system to use gravel instead of sand. iAVs is free and open source but the Speraneos commercialized the changes so they could sell their plans.
The criticism of aquaponics research for not adequately comparing nutrient availability in fish waste to that required by plants overlooks the comprehensive work done on iAVs and the data provided.
McMurtry's research demonstrated that with proper system design and management, including the selection of appropriate fish feed, iAVs can supply all necessary nutrients for a wide range of vegetable crops without the need for external nutrient inputs.
This is in contrast to many aquaponics systems that fail to fully utilize the nutrients in fish waste, often due to inadequate biofiltration or the removal of solid waste, which contains significant amounts of essential nutrients.
However, most studies use inefficient mechanical filtration methods that remove the majority of solids or fail to fully utilize the nutrients in fish waste. Furthermore, many systems are operated at suboptimal pH levels for plant uptake and do not incorporate design elements to ensure adequate oxygenation for mineralization.
At higher pH levels, essential macronutrients such as phosphorus, iron, manganese, boron, copper and zinc precipitate out of solution and become unavailable for plant uptake. This can lead to deficiencies in these nutrients. Many micronutrients rely on carriers or chelators for uptake at higher pH levels. For example, iron is commonly bound to chelating agents to remain soluble. However, these bound forms tend to be less bioavailable to plants than nutrient ions. At pH 7 and above, the availability of potassium (K+), calcium (Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+) and other cations is reduced. This occurs because there is increased competition from hydrogen ions and hydroxide ions under alkaline conditions. High pH causes phosphorus to precipitate out with calcium and magnesium, forming insoluble compounds. This phosphorus becomes inaccessible for plant growth.
In the iAVs approach, the system is designed to buffer pH around 6.5, which is ideal for nutrient availability and removes the need to adjust pH. In the iAVs research, pH stabilzed at week 5. Below neutral pH, phosphorus is more available since there is less calcium and magnesium to bind with it. This enables efficient phosphorus nutrition. Trace elements like iron, manganese, zinc, and copper are more soluble in acidic conditions. This allows plants to take up greater quantities of these essential micronutrients. Mildly acidic pH may even create an unfavorable environment for certain pathogenic fungi and bacteria that can infect plant roots and leaves.
At a pH below 7, ammonia is predominantly in the form of ammonium (NH4+), which plants can directly uptake. Ammonium is a preferred nitrogen source for many plants because it requires less energy to assimilate compared to nitrate (NO3-). Plants can save metabolic energy when absorbing ammonium compared to nitrate because converting nitrate to ammonium (a form that can be incorporated into amino acids) requires energy. This energy saving can then be redirected towards growth and development.
Although some nitrifying bacteria are less active at lower pH, plants absorb nitrate more efficiently in slightly acidic conditions. Protonation of nitrate to HNO3 facilitates transport across membranes. The excess oxygen and the focus on heterotrophs more than compensates for the reduced nitrification at a lower pH.
The end result is the false notion that aquaponic systems are inherently deficient in essential nutrients like potassium, calcium and iron. This echoes through the literature, with authors citing previous flawed studies to support supplemental fertilization.
The iAVs utilizes reciprocating flood irrigation over sand beds to foster aerobic mineralization of solids and nutrient capture. Careful attention is paid to system pH and oxygen levels. As a result, the iAVs consistently demonstrates that fish waste can fully meet plant nutritional needs without supplementation, as demonstrated and proven in the iAVs research.
By comparing aquaponics to hydroponics, the importance of organic matter and the potential for direct uptake of certain organic compounds by plants may be overlooked. This can lead to underestimating the nutritional potential of aquaponics systems.
Hydroponic solutions provide nutrients in inorganic forms that are immediately available to plants. In contrast, organic nutrients often come in complex forms that require microbial activity to break down into assimilable nutrients. This process can affect the rate at which nutrients become available to plants.
Some plants can uptake certain amino acids, enzymes, lipids, and sugars directly from organic sources, potentially "saving" metabolic energy that can then be used for growth. This direct uptake is not replicated with inorganic nutrient solutions.
Understanding the unique dynamics of aquaponic systems is essential for optimizing plant nutrition and debunking misconceptions about nutrient availability.
Our long term troll, Steve, has been claimingfor years that fish feed does not contain enough nutrients and needs supplementation, but when he interviewed James Rakocy himself, it was Rakocy that said "With the recommended ratio (1:2) no solids are removed from the system. ...With this system, nutrient supplementation may not be necessary"
Recent studies challenge the long-held belief in Liebig's law of the minimum, which states that plant growth is limited by the scarcest nutrient resource. Instead, complex algorithms that consider interactions among nutrients suggest that plants can thrive even under perceived nutrient limitations. This new understanding supports observations that many plants grown organically, with seemingly fewer nutrients, can outperform those grown hydroponically in terms of yield and efficiency. This phenomenon could be attributed to the more efficient use of nutrients facilitated by organic growing methods, which include symbiotic relationships with soil microbes that enhance nutrient uptake.
Heterotrophs play a crucial role in making nutrients from fish waste more available and broken down in aquaponic systems, offering significant advantages over systems that rely predominantly on autotrophs. The flawed methodology in many aquaponics studies has highlighted an over-reliance on autotrophs, such as nitrifying bacteria, which convert ammonia to nitrate but do not fully address the breakdown and mineralization of organic matter. The optimal pH for heterotrophs is around 6, which is also the optimum pH for availability of nutrients for plants. A pH lower than 7 is also a buffer against ammonia spikes.
Furthermore, the narrative that iAVs was "stolen" and modified into what is now commonly known as aquaponics highlights the lack of recognition for McMurtry's pioneering work and the potential of iAVs as a sustainable food production method. The commercialization of aquaponics, while contributing to its spread, has also led to variations that do not fully capture the efficiency and sustainability of the original iAVs method.
Tragically, the pioneering work on the iAVs has been largely ignored by mainstream aquaponics researchers. The system was originally stolen and altered in ways that undermined its efficiency. For example, exchanging sand for gravel severely limits the capacity to mineralize and retain nutrients in the reactor beds. This "aquaponics" offshoot perpetuates the myth of inherent nutritional deficiencies.
In conclusion, the flawed methodology in aquaponics research and the misconceptions about nutrient availability from fish waste stem from a departure from the principles of iAVs.
A return to these principles, with a focus on optimizing the use of fish waste as a nutrient source through proper system design and management, could address many of the deficiencies observed in current aquaponics practices.
The aquaponics community needs to acknowledge the reality that flaws in their methodologies have led to incorrect conclusions about the potential of these integrated systems. Carefully designed, as in the iAVs, aquaponics can be a highly efficient and sustainable method of food production without costly supplemental inputs.
We owe it to the visionaries who pioneered this technology to apply the scientific method rigorously and learn from their groundbreaking work.
In conclusion, the flawed methodology prevalent in aquaponics research, particularly the underestimation of nutrient availability from fish waste, can be traced back to a departure from the foundational principles of Integrated AquaVegeculture Systems (iAVs). The pioneering work of Dr. McMurtry and the iAVs Research Group has demonstrated that with proper system design and management, fish waste can indeed provide a complete nutrient profile for plant growth, negating the need for external supplementation .
The list below is a sample of the manuscripts that have used or are based on a flawed methodology;
Verma, Ajit Kumar, et al. "Aquaponics as an integrated agri-aquaculture system (IAAS): Emerging trends and future prospects." Technological Forecasting and Social Change 194 (2023): 122709.
Yep, Brandon, and Youbin Zheng. "Aquaponic trends and challenges–A review." Journal of Cleaner Production 228 (2019): 1586-1599.
Medina, Miles, et al. "Assessing plant growth, water quality and economic effects from application of a plant-based aquafeed in a recirculating aquaponic system." Aquaculture international 24 (2016): 415-427.
Khater, E. G. "Aquaponics: the integration of fish and vegetable culture in recirculating systems." Benha, Egypt (2006).
Licamele, Jason David. "Biomass production and nutrient dynamics in an aquaponics system." (2009).
Goddek, Simon, et al. "Challenges of sustainable and commercial aquaponics." Sustainability 7.4 (2015): 4199-4224.
Yang, Teng, and Hye-Ji Kim. "Characterizing nutrient composition and concentration in tomato-, basil-, and lettuce-based aquaponic and hydroponic systems." Water 12.5 (2020): 1259.
Wortman, Sam E. "Crop physiological response to nutrient solution electrical conductivity and pH in an ebb-and-flow hydroponic system." Scientia Horticulturae 194 (2015): 34-42.
Romano, Nicholas, Shahidul Islam, and Hayden Fischer. "Ebb and flow versus constant water level on the sweet banana chili pepper (Capsicum annuum) production in an aquaponic system." Aquacultural Engineering 102 (2023): 102340.
Blanchard, Caroline, et al. "Effect of pH on cucumber growth and nutrient availability in a decoupled aquaponic system with minimal solids removal." Horticulturae 6.1 (2020): 10.
Van Ginkel, Steven W., Thomas Igou, and Yongsheng Chen. "Energy, water and nutrient impacts of California-grown vegetables compared to controlled environmental agriculture systems in Atlanta, GA." Resources, Conservation and Recycling 122 (2017): 319-325.
Yavuzcan Yildiz, Hijran, et al. "Fish welfare in aquaponic systems: its relation to water quality with an emphasis on feed and faeces—a review." Water 9.1 (2017): 13.
Derikvand, Peyman, et al. "Inoculum and pH Effects on Ammonium Removal and Microbial Community Dynamics in Aquaponics Systems." Available at SSRN 4441800.
Fruscella, Lorenzo, et al. "Investigating the effects of fish effluents as organic fertilisers on onion (Allium cepa) yield, soil nutrients, and soil microbiome." Scientia Horticulturae 321 (2023): 112297.
Delaide, Boris, et al. "Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. Sucrine) growth performance in complemented aquaponic solution outperforms hydroponics." Water 8.10 (2016): 467.
Chen, Peng, et al. "Maximizing nutrient recovery from aquaponics wastewater with autotrophic or heterotrophic management strategies." Bioresource Technology Reports 21 (2023): 101360.
Nozzi, Valentina, et al. "Nutrient management in aquaponics: comparison of three approaches for cultivating lettuce, mint and mushroom herb." Agronomy 8.3 (2018): 27.
Duarte, Eglerson, et al. "Nutrients in lettuce production in aquaponics with tilapia fish compared to that with hydroponics." Revista Caatinga 36 (2023): 21-32.
Bittsanszky, Andras, et al. "Nutrient supply of plants in aquaponic systems." Ecocycles 2.2 (2016): 17-20.
Tyson, Richard V., Danielle D. Treadwell, and Eric H. Simonne. "Opportunities and challenges to sustainability in aquaponic systems." HortTechnology 21.1 (2011): 6-13.
Tsoumalakou, Evangelia, et al. “Precise Monitoring of Lettuce Functional Responses to Minimal Nutrient Supplementation Identifies Aquaponic System’s Nutrient Limitations and Their Time-Course.” Agriculture (Basel)., 2022
Zhanga, Hong, et al. "Recovery of nutrients from fish sludge as liquid fertilizer to enhance sustainability of aquaponics: A review." CHEMICAL ENGINEERING 83 (2021).
Gebauer, Radek, et al. "Species-and diet-specific aquaculture wastewater nutrient profile: Implications for aquaponics and development of sustainable aquaponics diet." Aquaculture 568 (2023): 739307.
2023.11.01 04:38 EternisedDragon Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear DebateAnAtheist subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano EruptionsAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight InfrastructureAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and KnowledgeAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billionLivestock: 24 billionBirds: 100 billion to 400 billionMammals: 100 billion to 1 trillionReptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillionAmphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillionFish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillionEarthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillionTerrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to DebateAnAtheist [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear DebateAnAtheist subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
- Macro-Ethical Scale of Evolution of Life: Certainly, if evolution of life happens somewhere or not is a very big deal in (macro) ethical terms since easily millions of species can be subjected to it, be involved in it, for several hundreds of millions, possibly even billions of years.
- Macro-Ethical Importance of Evolution of Life: Now, what also is surely very agreeable is that evolution can play out in extremely many different ways and with extremely large variety in its short- and long-term dynamic, with that depending on all kinds of events (of various qualitatively different types) happening during it at all or not, or later or sooner. And so the window, or (in terms of all in the process aggregated joy and suffering) distance between the worst kinds of an instance of evolution of life and the best kinds of it surely is astronomically huge, providing the subject matter with monumental relevance, importance due to its scale. And this is independent of where (i.e. wholly on the negative side or between the negative and the positive side, or entirely on the positive side) such an interval or window consisting of the whole range or spectrum of cases of evolution of life between the worst and the best cases lies on any continuous axis (from - infinity to + infinity) meant to account for the ethical evaluation of the whole, once everything of ethical relevance related to it has finished happening.
- Nearly guaranteed expectable decision-making- or design-improvement, rapidly in short time: Also, certainly any randomly intentionally or accidentally, maybe even unnoticed, kind of initiated instance of evolution elsewhere would not with any sufficiently high likelihood result in a form of evolution of life that is anywhere close among whatever the better actually plausible possible cases of it may be. And at the same time, science and technologies progress rapidly and surely can keep progressing speedily for millennia, if not hundreds of thousands of years, putting humanity then into a position with far greater holistic overview and comprehension of the matter. And given how gargantuan of a macro-ethically important matter this is, even if in the future we only could turn it into e.g. a 5% (relative to the window width) better version than any now possibly as such then irreversible version of evolution of life, the absolute difference would be unimaginably titanic.
- Humanity's historical, contextually as empirical reference frame relevant, abysmal track record: As our history repeatedly shows, humanity does not have a track record of managing complex large-scale matters anywhere near perfectly right, the 1st time around, in part due to unaccounted for side-effects. Huge problems tied in with them are more the norm than an exception. And on top of this, unfortunately there is several factors that likely make it harder for contemporary people to care about this topic, such as all the crises we had and still have here on earth, but also that it's about a huge risk for others, not ourselves, and it'd not be humans (though it could also eventually lead to species with human level intelligence being subjected to it) but wildlife animals (which generally are by people judged to have a lower priority of care compared to other humans), and the disaster would unfold far in the future (long past the lifetime of anyone that lives currently) and far away, and the means by which it'd happen would be in a very subtle manner of which the comprehension, understanding of all that is made less accessible by the interdisciplinary complexity of the subject and that it has to be explained in rather little time, as it doesn't take long anymore for future space missions and activities in general carrying these grave risks with them. And so it seems that just about all odds stand in opposition rather than in favor of people taking it seriously with the right mindset about it.
- It holds true that there is lack of any urgency or need for near-future final decision-making, by which to lock humanity out of otherwise currently still available, significant alternatives.
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano EruptionsAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight InfrastructureAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and KnowledgeAny at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billionLivestock: 24 billionBirds: 100 billion to 400 billionMammals: 100 billion to 1 trillionReptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillionAmphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillionFish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillionEarthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillionTerrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.10.28 22:36 EternisedDragon Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear areweinhell subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to areweinhell [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear areweinhell subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
On the topic, the most general, really absolutely undeniably impeccable argument (relying on far weaker binding, so more generally applicable, evident axioms) would be the following:
- Macro-Ethical Scale of Evolution of Life: Certainly, if evolution of life happens somewhere or not is a very big deal in (macro) ethical terms since easily millions of species can be subjected to it, be involved in it, for several hundreds of millions, possibly even billions of years.
- Macro-Ethical Importance of Evolution of Life: Now, what also is surely very agreeable is that evolution can play out in extremely many different ways and with extremely large variety in its short- and long-term dynamic, with that depending on all kinds of events (of various qualitatively different types) happening during it at all or not, or later or sooner. And so the window, or (in terms of all in the process aggregated joy and suffering) distance between the worst kinds of an instance of evolution of life and the best kinds of it surely is astronomically huge, providing the subject matter with monumental relevance, importance due to its scale. And this is independent of where (i.e. wholly on the negative side or between the negative and the positive side, or entirely on the positive side) such an interval or window consisting of the whole range or spectrum of cases of evolution of life between the worst and the best cases lies on any continuous axis (from - infinity to + infinity) meant to account for the ethical evaluation of the whole, once everything of ethical relevance related to it has finished happening.
- Nearly guaranteed expectable decision-making- or design-improvement, rapidly in short time: Also, certainly any randomly intentionally or accidentally, maybe even unnoticed, kind of initiated instance of evolution elsewhere would not with any sufficiently high likelihood result in a form of evolution of life that is anywhere close among whatever the better actually plausible possible cases of it may be. And at the same time, science and technologies progress rapidly and surely can keep progressing speedily for millennia, if not hundreds of thousands of years, putting humanity then into a position with far greater holistic overview and comprehension of the matter. And given how gargantuan of a macro-ethically important matter this is, even if in the future we only could turn it into e.g. a 5% (relative to the window width) better version than any now possibly as such then irreversible version of evolution of life, the absolute difference would be unimaginably titanic.
- Humanity's historical, contextually as empirical reference frame relevant, abysmal track record: As our history repeatedly shows, humanity does not have a track record of managing complex large-scale matters anywhere near perfectly right, the 1st time around, in part due to unaccounted for side-effects. Huge problems tied in with them are more the norm than an exception. And on top of this, unfortunately there is several factors that likely make it harder for contemporary people to care about this topic, such as all the crises we had and still have here on earth, but also that it's about a huge risk for others, not ourselves, and it'd not be humans (though it could also eventually lead to species with human level intelligence being subjected to it) but wildlife animals (which generally are by people judged to have a lower priority of care compared to other humans), and the disaster would unfold far in the future (long past the lifetime of anyone that lives currently) and far away, and the means by which it'd happen would be in a very subtle manner of which the comprehension, understanding of all that is made less accessible by the interdisciplinary complexity of the subject and that it has to be explained in rather little time, as it doesn't take long anymore for future space missions and activities in general carrying these grave risks with them. And so it seems that just about all odds stand in opposition rather than in favor of people taking it seriously with the right mindset about it.
- It holds true that there is lack of any urgency or need for near-future final decision-making, by which to lock humanity out of otherwise currently still available, significant alternatives.
Besides all of this, the same general line of reasoning would apply for all intelligent aliens with exo-biospheres of different biological constitution analogously. And not just that either, but all alien civilizations would have to account for all biologically distinct kinds of evolution of life possible in the universe - for if distinct kinds do exist - depending on the general distribution of habitable candidate worlds specific to each of them individually, and so in particular, intelligent aliens would have to account for our DNA-based kind of biosphere, and vice versa, humanity would have to account for the possibility of the emergence of biologically distinct cases of evolution of life.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident, and chances are that some of the past 46 Venus missions contaminated the planet, leading to its phosphine signatures.
Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries).
Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all. In this, our world, if a person wants to be regarded as an adult, serious person, they must learn to accept that the correct Trolley problem solution is person-identity-independent; one has to have the guts to make the right decision independently of where one stands personally.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.10.04 09:35 DAscent ThorNADa Storia - Andra Axinte
 | ThorNADa Storia - Andra Axinte submitted by DAscent to ZentasticArts [link] [comments] ThorNADa Storia - Andra AxinteInitial am zis ca luna asta dau skip la revista pentru ca pe langa lipsa de timp, pur si simplu nu imi gaseam inspiratie despre ce sa scriu.Iar azi pam.. de ce sa nu scriu eu despre ce am analizat astazi... ? Bun, stiti ca de curand am facut si formele legale pentru ThorNada... Mi-am facut un user intr-o aplicatie de facturare in care imi pot conecta si contul, si intr-un final dupa n incercari am reusit astazi sa imi leg contul in timp real la aceea aplicatie. Curioasa din fire, sa vad daca chiar a tras tot, am realizat ca acest cont, pe care l-am deschis special pentru ThorNada a implinit chiar azi un ani de zile si m-am apucat sa ma uit... ok ce am facut eu intr-un an de zile? Cheltuielile pe care le-am avut nu le trec aici, dar va spun ce incasari am reusit sa obtin intr-un an de zile... Si anume exact 2060 RON… strict incasari, nu cu cat banuti am ramas eu in mana dupa munca mea... adica astia 2060 de ron includ si materie prima, si transport... E putin? E mult? Daca te uiti dintr-o perspectiva, da, este extraordinar de putin... Insa, sunt banuti facuti in timpul liber... banuti facuti dupa serviciul de birou de 8 ore, dupa treaba deacasa... banuti facuti cu propriile mele maini, fara un sef, fara altcineva spunandu-mi fa aia, fa cealalta, fara vreun fel de promovare platita.... E putin, dar pentru mine este extraordinar de mult! Sa poti insa sa realizezi un banut, strict din puterile tale, strict pentru tine, nemuncind pentru altcineva, iti ofera un simtamand extraordinar! Nu planuiesc sa ma imbogatesc cu ThorNADa, nu planuiesc sa am preturi cu un adaos commercial de 200%, ThorNADa pentru mine este pasiunea mea, iar banutii de la ea sunt un extra venit care se duc in cresterea partiala a celor 4 animulate (ca nu acopera nici 50% din cat consuma ei) si visez candva sa imi fie si un ajutor in a avea o vancanta frumoasa... Si sa stiti, ca poate, chiar daca uneori preturile vi-i se par mari, eu va garantez ca nu sunt mari deloc... Incerc sa le tin la cel mai mic nivel la care pot, astfel incat sa aveti oportunitatea ca macar o data sa puteti lua un produs de la mine. Va garantez ca o sa va placa. This being said... luna lui septembrie a venit cu lansarea manusilor cu model in relief pe care le iubesc maxim. Gasiti detalii despre ele pe pagina mea, iar daca tot a inceput scoala va las si doua dintre semnele de carte pe care la realizez cu mare drag. Va astept aici , cu drag: fb.com/ThorNati instagram @thornada.storia |
2023.08.12 11:04 DAscent ZARevista: Opinci 100% Handmade & Barefoot
 | zentasticarts.ro ZARevista: Opinci 100% Handmade & Barefoot submitted by DAscent to ZentasticArts [link] [comments] zentasticarts.ro ZARevista: Opinci 100% Handmade & Barefoot Opinci 100% Handmade & BarefootEu sunt Mara sau pe vară mi se poate spune "opincăreasa" întrucât de 8 ani încalț în opincile Retromara, oameni care vor să își simtă tălpile neîngrădite, mai aproape de pământ, ca și când ar fi desculțe, zburdând cu bucurie. Opincile mele sunt super ușoare, confortabile și indeplinesc condițiile încălțărilor barefoot ("mers desculț").Totul a pornit în India, în Old Delhi, unde mă aflam într-o călătorie și am descoperit acest model de opinci. A fost super dragoste la prima vedere! După ce le-am încălțat și mi-am trăit povestea de îndrăgosteală cateva zile, a început să se înfiripe un sentiment nou în mine... dorința de a împărtăși și cu alții entuziasmul meu cu privire la aceste opinci. A fost, probabil, pentru prima oară când am simțit atât de puternic că vreau să se bucure și alte persoane de ceea ce mă bucură pe mine. Dar cum? Am avut insomnii câteva nopți, cu gândul la întrebarea asta. Ieșea din discuție un import, nu aveam bani pentru așa ceva. Mi-am zis că e cazul să mă liniștesc. După două luni, mi-a revenit aceeași dorință arzătoare că vreau să încalț și alte persoane cu aceste opinci. Alte insomnii...până într-o zi când mi-am zis: "Dar ce? Doar indienii pot face opincile astea?" Si ăla a fost momentul cheie când, de la intrebare până prima pereche de opinci Retromara au trecut mai puțin de doua săptămâni și prima comandă o primeam la câteva ore după ce am postat maxim de entuziasmată o poză cu ele. [...] Autor: RetroMara Citește articolul integral in #ZArevista - Ediția 3 https://zentasticarts.ro/revista/editia-august-2023/ |
2023.07.21 17:39 SuperAngryGuy Cannabis links part 3 (first half of 2023)
update: 21 July 2023
This was sourced from Google Scholar. Around Jan 2024 I'll do another scrape to get all the 2023 papers on a different thread (there's a character limit).
Interesting paper:
submitted by SuperAngryGuy to HandsOnComplexity [link] [comments]
This was sourced from Google Scholar. Around Jan 2024 I'll do another scrape to get all the 2023 papers on a different thread (there's a character limit).
Interesting paper:
- A Survey of Modern Greenhouse Technologies and Practices for Commercial Cannabis Cultivation
- Foliar Symptomology, Nutrient Content, Yield, and Secondary Metabolite Variability of Cannabis Grown Hydroponically with Different Single-Element Nutrient Deficiencies
- Cadmium Bioconcentration and Translocation Potential in Day Neutral and Photoperiod Sensitive Hemp Grown Hydroponically for the Medicinal Market
- Constructing Cannabis: A Foucauldian Genealogy (critical history) of Western Cannabis discourse and knowledge --master thesis
- Light Spectra Have Minimal Effects on Rooting and Vegetative Growth Responses of Clonal Cannabis Cuttings
- Thermal, energy, economic, and environmental analysis of a smart wastewater recovery system for indoor Cannabis production
- Towards dsRNA-integrated protection of medical Cannabis crops: considering human safety, recent- and developing RNAi methods, and research inroads
- THE EFFECTS OF REFLECTIVE PLASTICS ON FLOWER AND CANNABINOID YIELDS IN DAYNEUTRAL CANNABIS SATIVA L. IN A GREENHOUSE ENVIRONMENT UNDER SUPPLEMENTAL LIGHT
- Diniconazole Promotes the Yield of Female Hemp (Cannabis sativa) Inflorescence and Cannabinoids in a Vertical Farming System
- Is Twelve Hours Really the Optimum Photoperiod for Promoting Flowering in Indoor-Grown Cultivars of Cannabis sativa?
- Effects of Different N, P, and K Rates on the Growth and Cannabinoid Content of Industrial Hemp
- Comprehensive Transcriptome and Metabolome Analysis of Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L.) in Soil Under NaCl Stress
- Understanding bud rot development, caused by Botrytis cinerea, on cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) plants grown under greenhouse conditions
- Hydroponic Cultivation of Medicinal Plants—Plant Organs and Hydroponic Systems: Techniques and Trends
- Silicon Reduces Zinc Absorption and Trigger Oxidative Tolerance Processes Without Impacting Growth in Young Plants of Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L.)
- EFFECTIVENESS OF MYCORRHIZAE AND VERMICULTURE SEED INOCULATION FOR GERMINATION, VEGETATIVE GROWTH, CANNABINOID CONTENT, AND CURED FLOWER WEIGHT OF CBD-RICH HEMP (Cannabis sativa L.) --master thesis
- Varying light intensity can alter metabolic profile and cannabispiradienone content of industrial hemp
- Hemp Agronomy: Current Advances, Questions, Challenges, and Opportunities
- Mycorrhizal-based inoculants in the root microbiome enhanced phytocannabinoid production in medical Cannabis cultivars
- Combined ambient ionization mass spectrometric and chemometric approach for the differentiation of hemp and marijuana varieties of Cannabis sativa
- Flowering Response of Cannabis sativa L. ‘Suver Haze’ under Varying Daylength-Extension Light Intensities and Durations
- A protocol for rapid generation cycling (speed breeding) of hemp (Cannabis sativa) for research and agriculture --9 weeks seed to seed
- Comparison of the Cannabinoid and Terpene Profiles in Commercial Cannabis from Natural and Artificial Cultivation
- Varying light intensity can alter metabolic profile and cannabispiradienone content of industrial hemp
- A comprehensive review of the production technology ofCannabis sativaL. with its current legal status and botanicalfeatures
- Total yeast and mold levels in high THC-containing cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) inflorescences are influenced by genotype, environment, and pre-and post-harvest handling practices
- Glandular trichome development, morphology, and maturation are influenced by plant age and genotype in high THC-containing cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) inflorescences
- Effectiveness of Mycorrhizae and Vermiculture Seed Inoculation for Germination, Vegetative Growth, Cannabinoid Content, and Cured Flower Weight of CBD-Rich Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) with Microbial Growth Broth Improve Biomass and Secondary Metabolite Accumulation of Cannabis sativa L.
- Cannabis sativa: Applications of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Plant Tissue Culture for Micropropagation
- Maximizing medical cannabis growth and quality: An evaluation of the effects of ecological water regeneration in greenhouse cultivation
- Agronomic evaluation of Cannabis sativa (L.) cultivars in northern Colombia
- LED Technology Applied to Plant Development for Promoting the Accumulation of Bioactive Compounds: A Review --wide range of plants
- When Cannabis sativa L. Turns Purple: Biosynthesis and Accumulation of Anthocyanins
- Cannabis: a multifaceted plant with endless potentials
- CANNABIS SATIVA: ETHNOBOTANY AND PHYTOCHEMISTRY
- Cannabis sativaL.: ORIGIN, DISTRIBUTION, TAXONOMY AND BIOLOGY
- Phytochemical Composition and Antioxidant Activity of Various Extracts of Fibre Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Cultivated in Lithuania
- MEDICAL CANNABIS SATIVA (MARIJUANA OR DRUG TYPE): THE STORY OF DISCOVERY OF Δ9-TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL (THC)
- Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Agronomy and Utilization: A Review
- Uncovering the Potential and Handicaps of Non-drug Hemp Cultivation in South and Southeast Asia
- CURRENT TRENDS AND FUTURE PROSPECTS OF MEDICINAL CANNABIS: AN UNDERUTILIZED ANCIENT ETHNOMEDICINAL PLANT FOR HUMAN WELLBEING
- Efficacies of Biological Control Agents for Controlling Fusarium spp. in Soilless Cannabis Cultivation --master thesis
- A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO HEMP CULTIVATION, PROCESSING, TRADE, AND PUBLICATION IN THE OTTOMAN ERA
- Monitoring of Cannabis Cultivar Technological Maturity by Trichome Morphology Analysis and HPLC Phytocannabinoid Content
- Determining Antioxidant Activity of Cannabis Leaves Extracts from Different Varieties—Unveiling Nature’s Treasure Trove
- CANNABIS SATIVA: Industrial hemp (fiber type) - An Ayurvedic Traditional Herbal Medicine
- The Cannabis Plant as a Complex System: Interrelationships between Cannabinoid Compositions, Morphological, Physiological and Phenological Traits
- Δ9-TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL (THC): THE MAJOR PSYCHOACTIVE COMPONENT IS OF BOTANICAL ORIGIN
- Cannabis Extraction Technologies: Impact of Research and Value Addition in Latin America
- Correlations among morphological and biochemical traits in high-cannabidiol hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Water demands of permitted and unpermitted cannabis cultivation in Northern California
- Characterization of trichome phenotypes to assess maturation and flower development in Cannabis sativa L. (cannabis) by automatic trichome gland analysis
- Developing Prediction Models Using Near-Infrared Spectroscopy to Quantify Cannabinoid Content in Cannabis Sativa
- Temporal cannabinoids profile and biomass yield in cannabigerol dominant industrial hemp under different planting dates in southern Florida
- Quantitative Analysis of Cannabidiol and Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Contents in Different Tissues of Four Cannabis Cultivars using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
- Combined Effect of Biocompost and Biostimulant on Root Characteristics of Cannabis sativa L.
- Crown gall development on cannabis (Cannabis sativa L., marijuana) plants caused by Agrobacterium tumefaciens species-complex
- Nitrogen fertilization impact on hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) crop production: A review
- The Use of Silicon Substrate Amendments to Decrease Micronutrient Concentrations at Varying Micronutrient Fertility Rates with Cannabis sativa ‘Auto CBG’
- Extraction techniques for bioactive compounds of cannabis
- Floral hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) responses to nitrogen fertilization under field conditions in the high desert
- Alternative Rooting Methods for Medicinal Cannabis Cultivation in Denmark—Preliminary Results
- Biological control of Fusarium oxysporum causing damping-off and Pythium myriotylum causing root and crown rot on cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) plants
- Formation of the Quality Indicators of Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Seeds Sown under Organic Growing Technology
- Organically grown cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) plants contain a diverse range of culturable epiphytic and endophytic fungi in inflorescences and stem tissues
- Identification of Characteristic Parameters in Seed Yielding of Selected Varieties of Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Using Artificial Intelligence Methods
- The responses of Cannabis sativa to environmental stress: a balancing act
- Micropropagation of Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Study on the Effects of Light Intensity on the Growth and Metabolites of Industrial Hemp
- The Response of Cannabis Sativa Plants to Three Novel Plant Growth-Promoting Rhizobacteria: Yield and Cannabinoid and Terpene Profile
- Effect of Explant Source on Phenotypic Changes of In Vitro Grown Cannabis Plantlets over Multiple Subcultures
- Minimum Wage Pass-through to Wholesale and Retail Prices: Evidence from Cannabis Scanner Data
- Assessing the impact of piercing-sucking pests on greenhouse-grown industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Physiological and cannabinoid responses of hemp (Cannabis sativa) to rock phosphate dust under tropical conditions
- Controlled Environment Horticulture --99 pages, California codes and standards
- Loss of day length sensitivity by splice site mutation in Cannabis --what causes an auto flower to be an auto flower
- Characterization of Three Fusarium spp. Causing Wilt Disease of Cannabis sativa L. in Korea
- Variation in Hydric Response of Two Industrial Hemp Varieties (Cannabis sativa) to Induced Water Stress
- Optimizing in vitro germination of primed industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) seeds
- The role of cannabis (Cannabis sativa) cultivation growth as a driving force in land use and cover change (LUCC) in the upstream part of the Laou river catchment area (Northern Morocco)
- Using a global diversity panel of Cannabis sativa L. to develop a near InfraRed-based chemometric application for cannabinoid quantification
- Investigation of the Effect of the Auxin Antagonist PEO-IAA on Cannabinoid Gene Expression and Content in Cannabis sativa L. Plants under In Vitro Conditions
- Challenges and potentials of new breeding techniques in Cannabis sativa
- Genomics-based taxonomy to clarify cannabis classification
- Genetic Mapping of SNP Markers and Candidate Genes Associated with Day-Neutral Flowering in Cannabis sativa L
- Effects of chitin and chitosan on root growth, biochemical defense response and exudate proteome of Cannabis sativa
- Performance Evaluation of a Commercial Greenhouse in Canada Using Dehumidification Technologies and LED Lighting: A Modeling Study --math models for green houses
- Effect of silicon on some growth, physiological and phytochemical properties of Cannabis sativa L. in soil and soilless culture
- Biomass and Nutrient Accumulation by Dual-Purpose Hemp and Concurrent Soil Profile Water Depletion at Three Locations in Kansas in 2022
2023.04.08 08:01 EternisedDragon All or Nothing: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and the key to the 1 true Fermi Paradox solution)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear FermiParadox subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to FermiParadox [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear FermiParadox subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.04.05 09:23 EternisedDragon All or Nothing: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear BirthandDeathEthics subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to BirthandDeathEthics [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear BirthandDeathEthics subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.03.13 09:55 EternisedDragon All or Nothing: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Nihilism subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to nihilism [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Nihilism subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.03.11 10:42 EternisedDragon All or Nothing: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
For a more in-depth analysis and summary, see my previous posts here:
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Futurology subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
submitted by EternisedDragon to Futurology [link] [comments]
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/111n2l2/all_or_nothing_ethics_on_cosmic_scale_outer_space/
https://www.reddit.com/Efilism/comments/112p7au/hidden_red_deadlines_of_the_cosmos_prohibitions/
Dear Futurology subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction. Not only is humanity an "early game" civilization relative to the development of the universe, but we are also located in a so-called Super Spiral, the largest known kind of galaxies, and on top of this, we are a pre-galaxy-collision civilization as the Andromeda galaxy is approaching, which further increases the possible extent of naturally in magnitude upwards-cascading contamination processes, and all of this together - relative to nearly any other circumstance a civilization could find itself in - provides all that much more in the universe uniquely important reason and necessity for humanity to be utmost extremely careful with respect to outer space activities and to make sure to not risk irreversible forwards-contamination at all.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
This would be all. Thank you for reading, and especially in case of interest & understanding.
2023.02.14 00:11 EternisedDragon All or Nothing: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Outer Space Treaty, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
Dear Efilism subreddit,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
To summarize some of my most important e-mail contacts, namely those to the UN OOSA (Office of Outer Space Affairs), NASA, SPOC (SPace Operations Command), FBI (with to INTERPOL & CIA having no distinct content):
To: UNOOSA
Space Law
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment, (and Fermi's Paradox)
Dear UN Office for Outer Space Affairs,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found here: https://longtermrisk.org/the-importance-of-wild-animal-suffering/ . In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in 2014 should be taken to heart: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yROxal8jQZM .
To: SPOC
Public Inquiries
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment
Dear Space Operations Command,
I'd like to use this contact opportunity to raise awareness of the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its immense risk for sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. This topic deserves far more serious care & attention.
Claim & to be investigated rationale: Breakthrough Starshot & the Genesis Project show there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia in the UN's Outer Space Treaty, which is of imperative importance necessary, but global consensus on this fact is preferable.
Scientific studies show earth's animal wildlife mainly suffered during billions of years of evolution for billions of species, thus resulting in unutterable astronomic misery. For life on earth, humanity maybe can change this, but it's very unlikely for exoplanets if accidentally or intentionally kick-started evolution there would have the same fate.
Thanks for reading, especially in case of interest & understanding.
To: NASA
Solar System
Dear NASA,
if (then likely forever irreversible) celestial body contamination in future is even just risked by physical space exploration, legal consequences by the ICC will follow. This is my last warning. - M.Sc. B.C.H.
To: NASA
Solar System
Dear NASA,
in the last 3 months, I've informed more than 1000 worldwide organizations on the non-negotiable, extreme importance of preventing outer space contamination. Deviation from this ethically utmost important directive will not be tolerated.
To: UNOOSA
Space Law
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
URGENT!!!
BAN ALL PHYSICAL OUTER SPACE EXPLORATION MISSIONS TO CELESTIAL BODIES ALREADY! NO EXCEPTIONS! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR? WE INARGUABLY, ABSOLUTELY OUGHT NOT TO UNFATHOMABLY IRRESPONSIBLY, UTTERLY RECKLESSLY RISK KICK-STARTING ENTIRE EVOLUTION OF LIFE PROCESSES ELSEWHERE! ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, AND NEVER AFTERWARDS EITHER! HARD SCIENCE & THE CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM (SEE PERSIS ESKANDER & BRIAN TOMASIK) EXTREMELY STRONGLY ARGUE THAT SUFFERING DOMINATES THROUGHOUT WILDLIFE ANIMAL SPECIES FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS. GOOGLE "ETHICS ON COSMIC SCALE" IF NEED BE. HOW HAS THIS NOT HAPPENED YET AFTER E-MAILING MORE THAN 4.000 INSTITUTES & PROFESSORS FOR HALF A YEAR? HOW MANY ELITE INTELLECTUALS ON EARTH DOES IT TAKE TO CHANGE THIS LIGHTBULB? THE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM'S LONG-TERM FATE DEPENDS ON IT!
M.Sc. (TUM) Bernd Clemens Huber
To: NASA
Solar System
Be scientifically asserted that you're risking a gargantuan forwards-contamination mistake with extremely dire consequences by the means of missions to celestial bodies such as ice moons, worse than a quintillion Hitlers. ONE DOES NOT PLAY GOD!
To: FBI
What was the crime/incident that occurred?
Mass shooting, bombing, weapons of mass destruction, terrorism
What type of attack are you reporting?
Bioterrorism / Space Agencies & Scientists negligently risking playing interplanetary & interstellar god by forever irreversibly kick-starting evolution of life via forwards-contamination.
What makes you believe the attack will occur? How do you know the attack will occur?
The existence of the still planned Laplace-P & JUICE & Europa Clipper & EnEx & Tianwen-4 & VERITAS & DAVINCI+ flyby & lander missions, as well as by NASA Science Directorate Associate John Grunsfeld already confirmed forwards-contamination of Mars.
Is the attack being organized by a group or individual? Are there any known associates?
Multiple attacks, by groups & individuals: SpaceX, ROSCOSMOS, ESA, JPL, NASA, DLR, CNSA; Yuri Milner (Breakthrough Starshot, Project Starlight), Prof. Dr. Claudius Gros (GENESIS project).
Does this person or group have access to firearms, explosives, or any other chemical? If so, what weapons are involved?
Above listed agencies have access to chemicals suitable for space rocket propulsion, but the concern is about resilient stowaway microbes possibly eventually leading to in number and duration astronomical extents of wild animal suffering in the far future.
Do you know the plan of attack(when, where, has there been any rehearsals of the attack)?
Partly, yes. Most launch date month information for space rockets with interplanetary destination of payload is publicly accessible (JUICE: April 2023; Laplace-P: ??? 2023; Europa Clipper: October 2024; EnEx: ??? ???; Dragonfly: June 2027; VERITAS: December 2027; DAVINCI+: June 2029; Tianwen-4: October 2029; Starlight: ??? ???; Breakthrough Starshot: ??? 2036; GENESIS project: ??? ???).
Do you have any information about the individual who committed the crime (the subject)?
No
Do you have any information about the individual who witnessed the crime?
No
Have you reported this information to another law enforcement or government agency (local, state, or federal)?
Yes
About 5.000 worldwide institutions, professors, and others of all kind so far in the last half year.
[Part 1/2]
https://preview.redd.it/n20ilsq5h1ia1.png?width=1899&format=png&auto=webp&s=3ae41532ef24b0f4a56b6e131862424206870479
submitted by EternisedDragon to Efilism [link] [comments]
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found at the Center for Long-Term Risk's page on the importance of animal suffering. In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in a video titled "Space colonization and animal ethics" in 2014 should be taken to heart. And the same for Persis Eskander's talks from 2017 and 2018, summarized on the Effective Altruism site's page titled "Crucial Considerations in Wild Animal Suffering".
Claim: The existence of past & recent projects alike the Venera 7, Pioneer 10 & Huygens spacecraft missions, 21 Mars lander or rover (including Curiosity & Perseverance rover) missions like InSight & Tianwen-1 as well as the Enceladus Explorer, Europa Lander, Gan De, Uranus Orbiter & Probe, Laplace-P, Enceladus Orbilander, and Neptune Odyssey missions and BioSentinel, Project Starlight, Breakthrough Starshot & Prof. Claudius Gros' Genesis Project strongly indicate that there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia currently in the United Nation's Outer Space Treaty, which I think - at least until sufficient research and ethical evaluations are done, which admittedly may take decades or centuries even - is desperately needed & of imperative importance. However, a fast development of a global, international, emotionally intelligent consensus on voluntary self-restraint in regards to Directed Panspermia type projects, out of respect & care for how riskfully consequential such projects can be, may be even safer and hence preferable.
To be questioned & investigated rationale for this claim: The topic is too vast & complex for me to concisely elaborate on all potentially relevant aspects (that I'm aware of) of it in here, so I'd like to summarize the main points of my & others' concerns: If we take earth's historical evolution of life as reference point for orientation & if there is plausible reason to assume that the majority of prehistoric life - by means of the widespread presence of pain-receptors & some forms of sentience - was not only, but also filled with suffering of therein involved many millions of species' populations at any given time across a few hundred millions of years, and to the extent to which this may all in all amount to unutterable extents of misery, then even if it is the case for earth that humanity is for the foreseeable future the only - and thereby critically important - species capable of finally turning this otherwise possibly almost endless misery into an overall pleasant existence e.g. using lab-grown meat and technological breakthroughs alike it, it still remains to be uncovered if even just locally this misery can in any form be compensated for, and there's no guarantee. Now, if there is reason to believe that one can generalize or extrapolate from earth's case to a sufficient variety of exoplanets (or celestial bodies in general), especially if it cannot even ever be ensured that colonies on exoplanets would treat the topic of Directed Panspermia carefully themselves or that their own presence as caretakers is ensured to hold sufficiently long compared to any introduced already primitive life forms (rather than starting with RNA, DNA, or single cells only) so that the dramatic consequences for wildlife animals can then last for billions of years even, then this constitutes an extremely strong argument against rushing developments towards such projects.
As reminder: The climate, biological and nuclear and chemical threats, autonomous A.I., microplastics, and other topics - in our history, humanity had to learn after mistakes were already made, which often times turned into burdens that later generations had to carry. While for these cases the - still devastating - consequences may be more limited in scope, I think when it's about the cosmos, it'd be wiser to approach this matter in a more reluctant, mindful manner, with long-term foresight, and without forgetting about ethics. Power & knowledge demands responsibility in its use, and it cannot be allowed for anyone to play god with exoplanets by kick-starting evolution of life there. And just because the universe contains so far uninhabited but habitable hells, this doesn't mean we should even just infinitesimally risk populating them, especially in those instances in which they are so far away that it is utterly impossible to control what happens there. Contamination of celestial bodies with rapidly exponentially in numbers growing multi-cellular microbes would constitute a forever irreversible point of no return, especially for those several very near-future missions aiming at those moons estimated to be most capable of allowing life on them & therefore carrying the highest contamination risks: Enceladus, Europa, Titan, Ganymede, Callisto, Triton. As reference, even the microbes on the ISS eventually started to for their metabolism consume the cleaning substances meant for sterilization. And according to John Grunsfeld, the associate administrator of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, Mars already has been contaminated with microbes by accident. Let's think of the possibly thousands or even millions of future generations that will judge us, our behavior. If nothing's done about it, the clock until forwards-contamination happens keeps ticking down. The entirety of humanity together - including whatever the future can be - does NOT sit on the most populated Trolley Problem track, and we ought to better know our due place in this universe and act accordingly. Those who do not understand the all-species-encompassing, dominantly widespread extent of pain can never understand true peace. To express the matter in a metaphor, a chain is only as strong as its weakest element, and for ventures into new technological and scientific frontiers, history repeatedly demonstrated that the weakest element is at the beginning, when the knowledge and experience with a subject matter is the smallest (without the entirety of people being entrustable to act carefully enough, namely in accordance to this circumstance), especially regarding long-term consequences and far away, subtly and with delay accumulating large-scale effects of which their prevention can require having predicted them long ago already. So it seems extremely concerningly plausible that if (interplanetary or interstellar) forwards-contaminations happen ever at all (until finally never anymore), that it happens within this very - new space rush mentality plagued - century (which then were to negatively affect generations across thousands of future centuries). Positive & negative (alike other SI-units of measurement very well quantifiable) feelings - by the precise causal means of emergence via a specific set of neuro-chemical processes - contribute to and in summation determine the development of the value and meaning generated within our universe, independent of who experiences those feelings - it solely matters if they actually happen and therefore need to be accounted for. And absolutely no principle ought to get in the way of the in its logical position unique axiomatic principle of total sum of overall generated scalar levels of well-being maximization across all time, not even the principle of justice (as it isn't absolved from scrutiny in ethics either and isn't allowed to cause misery), though just solely precisely in those instances of it in which following it were to be required to come at an unavoidable cost in terms of reducing the total sum of overall generated well-being, since otherwise, justice serves the well-being maximization principle as well. To quote the most famous physicist: "Compassionate people are geniuses in the art of living, more necessary to the dignity, security, and joy of humanity than the discoverers of knowledge." Interstellar directed panspermia en masse, if ever perpetrated, potentially causes up to a - once initiated naturally self-feeding and out of control - near eternal chain-reaction of cosmos-wide calamity, and therefore this warning message is about nothing less than saving the Milky Way galaxy (or even the world beyond it) from the worst possible case scenario that could ever befall it. Here is a quote attributed to Hunter S. Thompson: "For every moment of triumph (and for every instance of beauty), many souls must be trampled." Furthermore, in case appeals to reason or negotiations may fail, interception of forwards-contamination-risking spacecraft enacted by nations on earth's crust that grasp the non-negotiably imperative importance of preventing kick-started entire evolution of life processes by irreversible biological forwards-contamination may unnecessarily risk international misunderstandings of (far less harmful but still) grave consequences alike mutually assured destruction.
Also, on the topic of Fermi's Paradox, it might be worthwhile considering the plausibility of the following hypothetical explanation:
=== Ethical explanation ===
It is possible that ethical assessment of general forms of evolution of life in the universe constitutes the central issue which intelligent alien species' macroscopic decision-making, such as for the topic of natural [[panspermia]], [[directed panspermia]], [[space colonization]], [[megastructures]], or [[self-replicating spacecraft]], revolves around. If the result of [[utility]] evaluations of enough and sufficiently in time extended initial or lasting portions of expected or prospective cases of evolution is among all other ethically relevant factors the dominant ethical concern of intelligent alien species, and if furthermore a large enough negative expected utility is assigned to sufficiently common forms of expected or prospective cases of evolution, then foregoing directed panspermia, space colonization, the construction of megastructures, sending out self-replicating spacecraft, but also active attempts to mitigate the consequences of interplanetary and interstellar forms of natural panspermia may follow. While in the case of [[space colonization]] it might ultimately stay too uncontrollable to - by technical or educational means - ensure [[settlers]] or emerging [[space colonies]] themselves consistently keep acting in accordance to the awareness of by [[colonizer]] considered major ethical dangers accompanying physical interstellar [[space exploration]], and for the case of interstellar self-replicating spacecraft, due to potential prebiotic substances in [[interstellar clouds]] and exoplanets' atmospheres and soils, it may forever stay impossible to ensure their [[Sterilization (microbiology)sterility]] to avoid contamination of celestial bodies which may kick-start uncontrollable evolution processes, reasons to forego the creation of a megastructure, even if such may be beneficial to an intelligent alien species and also to some other intelligent alien species imitators, may mainly have psychological origin. Since certain megastructures may be identifiable to be of unnatural, intelligent design requiring origin by foreign intelligent alien species, for as long as the by an intelligent alien species expected number of (especially less experienced or less far developed) from them foreign intelligent alien species capable of identifying their megastructure as such is large enough, the by them rather uncontrollable spectrum of interstellar space endeavor related influences this may have on those foreign intelligent alien species might constitute a too strong ethical deterrence from creating megastructures that are from outer space identifiable as such, until eventually a lasting state of cosmic privacy may be attained by natural or technological means.
On the topic of space expansionism, I think there would be books to fill with considerations about it, and I have many (what I think would be) noteworthy informally documented points on the topic, but for now, some of the most important ones that I'd like to forward would be the following. I hope my slight intellectual dishonesty (used as maybe psychologically manipulative means to press on the matter) in using mathematical nomenclature that alludes to the following statements to appear as if they were in a mathematical, absolute sense proven when that isn't quite true can be forgiven, but I genuinely am of the opinion that for the time being, it would be safer, better if humanity were to think of it as proven:
Here is the core of the theory of everything that matters:
- Axiom of Importance: The ethical importance of an issue increases alongside the number of therein involved sentient lifeforms, the time duration during which they are affected by it, and the vastness of the affected space to the extent to which changes of it affect the lifeforms. Or more directly, it increases with the absolute difference in caused, resulting time-integrals over all (with receptor-specific intensities weighed) pleasure & pain receptor-signals for any and all sentient beings.
- Extreme case: By the in the above statement defined abstract, general standard, according to the current body of humanity's knowledge, general forms of evolution of life (if on earth or on exoplanets) forever constitute the most ethically important issue to exist in the universe: With billions of species - each with numerous individual lifeforms - together with durations on the scale of billions of years, and spacial extension of at least a whole planet, it dwarfs any other conceivable ethical issue's level of importance.
- Valuation Axiom for the extreme case: According to many scientific studies, such as by Richard Dawkins, Brian Tomasik, Alejandro Villamor Iglesias, Oscar Horta, pain and suffering dominates over joy for animal wildlife in general forms of Darwinian evolution of life due to the global war-like situation commonly framed as survival of the fittest (rather than the demise of all unfit), and therefore - when accumulated across all logically entangled parameters such as duration and count of involved individuals - instances of such forms of evolution of life has to be kept at a minimum in the universe, as there never was and never will be anything that could be more important, to change the conclusion of this Anti-Panspermia-implying directive.
- Special Cosmos Ethics Theorem: Exoplanet-Wildlife-Development-Control-dependent Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
Proof (by contradiction):
This conclusion deductively follows from the concerningly plausible, by many scientific studies supported, Axiom that general animal wildlife - not only as it has been throughout evolution on earth, but on a more general level that would apply to exoplanet life of our biological kind, too - for the vast majority of it is dominated by pain and suffering rather than joy (reference: Center for Long-Term Risk).
Assume the existence of a counter-example:
It could be argued that IF overall worthwhile to exist life on a larger scale were to rely on previous evolutionary animal wildlife's existence and that the former were to safely come from the latter, that THEN it could possibly be better for evolutionary animal wildlife to come into existence than not.
Proof (by Ethical Dominance Principle) of the impossibility of the existence of counter-examples:
However, given that aforementioned, dominant wildlife animal pain and suffering in its amount and hence importance and priority for macro-scale decision-making increases by the duration throughout which such a miserable, in itself unwantable state persists, and that in the case of general forms of evolution of life, we have to expect that it can last for extraordinary long times of what essentially is involuntary, if avoidable unnecessary torture by the banal means of nature's own ruthlessness, namely that it can last for billions of years, and furthermore that these time-spans are unavoidable if it shall lead to intelligent species, we can therefore conclude that the severity of this issue dominates every other to this date conceivable, plausible ethical issue, since all other ethical issues absolutely pale in comparison to the magnitudes of magnitudes by which this central ethical issue overshadows them all, in such a uniquely outstanding way that risking billion years full of suffering for thousands of individuals of at any time billions of wildlife exoplanet animals each can for nothing in the world be a by any standards reasonable sacrifice to make.
Therefore, by humanity's current full body of knowledge, what happens to wildlife animals part of any actual, prospective, or potentially risked to exist instances of evolution of life constitutes the single most dominating, for ethical macro-scale decision-making behavior sole determinant factor of consideration.
Corollary 1.1: Time-Global Anti-Panspermia Directive for Humanity
If humanity is never able or can never be able to safely control exoplanet wildlife's entire development for the purpose of guaranteeing its & all by its own activities potentially emerging foreign exoplanet wildlife's pain-less flourishing, for any exoplanet wildlife risked to emerge or exist as consequence of humanity's outer space activities, then it follows that humanity shall NEVER engage in activities that risk causing such.
- Central Cosmos Ethics Theorem: General Anti-Panspermia Prime Directive
Corollary 2.1: Anti-Panspermia Directive on local Star System Contamination
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking contamination of a celestial body within the local star system with (not necessarily extremophile) micro-organisms is to be prevented. This includes causing the emergence and spread of micro-organisms on a celestial body of the local star system, potentially followed by eventual interstellar transportation of by it emerging (extremophile) micro-organisms on the celestial body via natural panspermia, such as meteorites entering such celestial body's atmosphere to pick the organisms up and continue towards interstellar space via sling-shot.
Corollary 2.2: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Faring
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking space-faring activities are to be prevented. This includes not only space probes, satellites, solar sails, and light sails but also von-Neumann-Probes (self-replicating Spacecraft), (replicating) seeder ships, and space-faring of individuals where the Anti-Panspermia abiding behavior of them and later generations after them cannot be ensured.
Corollary 2.3: Natural Anti-Panspermia Directive
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural litho-panspermia processes are to be prevented. This includes (extremophile) micro-organism transportation methods via space dust, meteorites, asteroids, comets, planetoids, planets, and debris ejected into space upon celestial body collisions.
Corollary 2.4: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Mega-Structures
Any construction of a mega-structure that at least infinitesimally - due to literally far reaching psychological influences - risks contamination or panspermia being risked or pursued via outer space activities from any other - for the detection of such mega-structure in astronomy engaging - alien civilization is to be prevented.
Corollary 2.5: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Super Geyser and Super Volcano Eruptions
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable natural super geyser and super volcano eruptions on a by life inhabited planet that can reach beyond its exosphere are to be prevented, or altered so they safely don't risk contamination or panspermia anymore.
Corollary 2.6: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Space-Flight Infrastructure
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable space-flight infrastructure construction or use is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated.
Corollary 2.7: Anti-Panspermia Directive on Science, Technology, and Knowledge
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable scientific or technological activities or knowledge is to be prevented or irreversibly deleted, or at least sufficiently restricted, controlled, and regulated. This includes solar sail and light sail related technology, science, and knowledge. This may at first glance seem to be excessive, but for comparison, by magnitudes far less in their potential damage severe dual-use technologies are classified & are subject of strict continual control, too.
Corollary 2.8: Anti-Panspermia Directive on (Mass) Psychology
Any at least infinitesimally contamination or panspermia risking, preventable psychological influence is to be prevented, or at least sufficiently restricted. This includes the propagation of news of any astronomical discovery of a bio-signature or techno-signature or celestial body of special interest such as habitable exoplanets.
Remark: The importance of prevention measures for types of panspermia (according to the above general line of reasoning) depends on the level of (lack of) controllability of the potential long-term consequences (in terms of kick-started evolution of life) that may emerge as result from such, and for the purpose of differentiating in a reasonable manner that has this control-related parameter in mind, it makes sense to differentiate between interstellar and interplanetary panspermia, as at least it seems more plausible that interplanetary panspermia - if it were to happen - would be easier and more timely to control (although not necessarily sufficiently controllable).
Also, to cite the animal suffering Wikipedia page's top paragraph with sources (though there is many more, namely 244 of them):
Wild animal suffering is the suffering experienced by nonhuman animals living outside of direct human control, due to harms such as disease, injury, parasitism, starvation and malnutrition, dehydration, weather conditions, natural disasters, and killings by other animals,[1][2] as well as psychological stress.[3] Some estimates indicate that these individual animals make up the vast majority of animals in existence.[4] An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution[5] and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.[1][6][7]
[1] Tomasik, Brian (2015-11-02). "The Importance of Wild-Animal Suffering". Relations. Beyond Anthropocentrism. 3 (2): 133–152. doi:10.7358/rela-2015-002-toma. ISSN 2280-9643.
[5] Dawkins, Richard (1995). "Chapter 4: God's Utility Function". River Out of Eden. London: Orion Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-297-81540-2.
[6] Horta, Oscar (2010). "Debunking the Idyllic View of Natural Processes: Population Dynamics and Suffering in the Wild" (PDF). Télos. 17 (1): 73–88.
[7] Iglesias, Alejandro Villamor (2018). "The overwhelming prevalence of suffering in Nature". Revista de Bioética y Derecho. 2019: 181–195.
For reference, here are scientific estimates on the number of existing animals on earth at any time throughout hundreds of millions of years (with the exception of humans and livestock, of course):
Humans: 8 billion
Livestock: 24 billion
Birds: 100 billion to 400 billion
Mammals: 100 billion to 1 trillion
Reptiles: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Amphibians: 100 billion to 100 trillion
Fish: 10 trillion to 1 quadrillion
Earthworms: 100 trillion to 100 quadrillion
Terrestrial Insects: 100 quadrillion to 10 quintillion
An opinion position - especially if it were based on a bambi fantasy worldview emerging from cognitive dissonance - opposed to all these facts would be severely anti-scientific and with public communication I'm making sure for the long-term future for when humanity may look back into what is then history, to document people's development of opinion positions on this utmost critical matter. In case the previous arguments haven't been convincing enough yet, there has been not a single invention or technology by humanity that was immediately perfect, and because this gives immensely strong reason for expecting a forwards-contamination event to have abysmally miserable consequences and given the scale that's at stake, humanity must have more discipline and patience with respect to physical outer space exploration at the very least for the next centuries, and on top of this, stubbornly money-focused market and business incentives even worsen the situation further by steering humanity towards rushing into the outer space frontier which though absolutely, non-negotiably ought to be refrained from, as if there weren't already enough crises due to several historical mistakes of the very same nature. The urgency of this matter easily beats even the urgency of the climate crisis by at least a decade, where - for comparison's sake - even if a climate crisis were to cast disaster onto earth for thousand years, its scale were to still be not even a hundred-thousandth of how long wildlife suffering throughout entire evolutions of life last.
The advocacy of physical outer space exploration (which plausibly risks over short astronomical time turning into an - up to at most some point of eventual saturation - cascadingly magnifying catastrophe once an ice moon were to be contaminated, since many of them have geysers spewing material out more than 100 kilometers and past their exospheres into space from where space rocks can catch and carry them to the next celestial body, allowing for an escalatory feedback process) will in the long run age very poorly, since physical outer space exploration via possible contamination negligently risks quintillion times mass torture of future wildlife animals, and constitutes an extremely irresponsible form of arrogant hubris by daring to play god with foreign worlds despite great lack of understanding of the very long-term consequences. Unlike in the Sorcerer's Apprentice's situation, for humanity there will be no magical sorcerer Pankrates to rid the spirits that his apprentice once called.
To summarize some of my most important e-mail contacts, namely those to the UN OOSA (Office of Outer Space Affairs), NASA, SPOC (SPace Operations Command), FBI (with to INTERPOL & CIA having no distinct content):
To: UNOOSA
Space Law
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment, (and Fermi's Paradox)
Dear UN Office for Outer Space Affairs,
I'm well aware there already is another major crisis currently. Nonetheless - due to my only recent realization on this message's subject matter - I'd like to use this contact opportunity in an attempt to raise awareness of what I'm by science convinced of being the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its inherent immense risk for the future of sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. And I think this topic deserves far more serious care and attention, especially from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). Further insightful elaboration & scientific sources on the topic can be found here: https://longtermrisk.org/the-importance-of-wild-animal-suffering/ . In particular, the stark concerns which Brian Tomasik from the Effective Altruism group expressed (already) in 2014 should be taken to heart: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yROxal8jQZM .
To: SPOC
Public Inquiries
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment
Dear Space Operations Command,
I'd like to use this contact opportunity to raise awareness of the ethically most important subject for all of humanity's future, due to its immense risk for sentient beings in general: Natural & especially Directed Panspermia. This topic deserves far more serious care & attention.
Claim & to be investigated rationale: Breakthrough Starshot & the Genesis Project show there is no prohibition of Directed Panspermia in the UN's Outer Space Treaty, which is of imperative importance necessary, but global consensus on this fact is preferable.
Scientific studies show earth's animal wildlife mainly suffered during billions of years of evolution for billions of species, thus resulting in unutterable astronomic misery. For life on earth, humanity maybe can change this, but it's very unlikely for exoplanets if accidentally or intentionally kick-started evolution there would have the same fate.
Thanks for reading, especially in case of interest & understanding.
To: NASA
Solar System
Dear NASA,
if (then likely forever irreversible) celestial body contamination in future is even just risked by physical space exploration, legal consequences by the ICC will follow. This is my last warning. - M.Sc. B.C.H.
To: NASA
Solar System
Dear NASA,
in the last 3 months, I've informed more than 1000 worldwide organizations on the non-negotiable, extreme importance of preventing outer space contamination. Deviation from this ethically utmost important directive will not be tolerated.
To: UNOOSA
Space Law
Subject: Ethics on Cosmic Scale, Directed Panspermia, Forwards-Contamination, Outer Space Treaty, Technology Assessment, Planetary Protection, (and Fermi's Paradox)
URGENT!!!
BAN ALL PHYSICAL OUTER SPACE EXPLORATION MISSIONS TO CELESTIAL BODIES ALREADY! NO EXCEPTIONS! WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WAITING FOR? WE INARGUABLY, ABSOLUTELY OUGHT NOT TO UNFATHOMABLY IRRESPONSIBLY, UTTERLY RECKLESSLY RISK KICK-STARTING ENTIRE EVOLUTION OF LIFE PROCESSES ELSEWHERE! ESPECIALLY NOT IN THE 21ST CENTURY, AND NEVER AFTERWARDS EITHER! HARD SCIENCE & THE CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE ALTRUISM (SEE PERSIS ESKANDER & BRIAN TOMASIK) EXTREMELY STRONGLY ARGUE THAT SUFFERING DOMINATES THROUGHOUT WILDLIFE ANIMAL SPECIES FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS. GOOGLE "ETHICS ON COSMIC SCALE" IF NEED BE. HOW HAS THIS NOT HAPPENED YET AFTER E-MAILING MORE THAN 4.000 INSTITUTES & PROFESSORS FOR HALF A YEAR? HOW MANY ELITE INTELLECTUALS ON EARTH DOES IT TAKE TO CHANGE THIS LIGHTBULB? THE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEM'S LONG-TERM FATE DEPENDS ON IT!
M.Sc. (TUM) Bernd Clemens Huber
To: NASA
Solar System
Be scientifically asserted that you're risking a gargantuan forwards-contamination mistake with extremely dire consequences by the means of missions to celestial bodies such as ice moons, worse than a quintillion Hitlers. ONE DOES NOT PLAY GOD!
To: FBI
What was the crime/incident that occurred?
Mass shooting, bombing, weapons of mass destruction, terrorism
What type of attack are you reporting?
Bioterrorism / Space Agencies & Scientists negligently risking playing interplanetary & interstellar god by forever irreversibly kick-starting evolution of life via forwards-contamination.
What makes you believe the attack will occur? How do you know the attack will occur?
The existence of the still planned Laplace-P & JUICE & Europa Clipper & EnEx & Tianwen-4 & VERITAS & DAVINCI+ flyby & lander missions, as well as by NASA Science Directorate Associate John Grunsfeld already confirmed forwards-contamination of Mars.
Is the attack being organized by a group or individual? Are there any known associates?
Multiple attacks, by groups & individuals: SpaceX, ROSCOSMOS, ESA, JPL, NASA, DLR, CNSA; Yuri Milner (Breakthrough Starshot, Project Starlight), Prof. Dr. Claudius Gros (GENESIS project).
Does this person or group have access to firearms, explosives, or any other chemical? If so, what weapons are involved?
Above listed agencies have access to chemicals suitable for space rocket propulsion, but the concern is about resilient stowaway microbes possibly eventually leading to in number and duration astronomical extents of wild animal suffering in the far future.
Do you know the plan of attack(when, where, has there been any rehearsals of the attack)?
Partly, yes. Most launch date month information for space rockets with interplanetary destination of payload is publicly accessible (JUICE: April 2023; Laplace-P: ??? 2023; Europa Clipper: October 2024; EnEx: ??? ???; Dragonfly: June 2027; VERITAS: December 2027; DAVINCI+: June 2029; Tianwen-4: October 2029; Starlight: ??? ???; Breakthrough Starshot: ??? 2036; GENESIS project: ??? ???).
Do you have any information about the individual who committed the crime (the subject)?
No
Do you have any information about the individual who witnessed the crime?
No
Have you reported this information to another law enforcement or government agency (local, state, or federal)?
Yes
About 5.000 worldwide institutions, professors, and others of all kind so far in the last half year.
[Part 1/2]
https://preview.redd.it/n20ilsq5h1ia1.png?width=1899&format=png&auto=webp&s=3ae41532ef24b0f4a56b6e131862424206870479
2022.11.11 18:06 SuperAngryGuy SAG's Open Cannabis Links part 2
11 NOV 2022
Part of SAG's Lighting Guide
I ran in to the 40,000 character limit with part 1
I still have to take time to organize everything! I have over 250 papers to go over and reorganize. This is less than half of all cannabis papers that have now been published.
Most interesting and contradicts Bruce Bugbee:
submitted by SuperAngryGuy to HandsOnComplexity [link] [comments]
Part of SAG's Lighting Guide
I still have to take time to organize everything! I have over 250 papers to go over and reorganize. This is less than half of all cannabis papers that have now been published.
- Impact of Far-red Light Supplementation On Yield and Growth of Cannabis sativa (master thesis- will be made public May 2023. "Results showed a decrease in yield and an increase in height as far-red light intensity increased")
- A Comprehensive Review on the Techniques for Extraction of Bioactive Compounds from Medicinal Cannabis
- Light Quality Impacts Vertical Growth Rate, Phytochemical Yield and Cannabinoid Production Efficiency in Cannabis sativa
- Performance Evaluation of a Commercial Greenhouse in Canada Using Dehumidification Technologies and Led Lighting: A Modeling Study
- Impacts of Different Light Spectra on CBD, CBDA and Terpene Concentrations in Relation to the Flower Positions of Different Cannabis Sativa L. Strains
- Indoor grown cannabis yield increased proportionally with light intensity, but ultraviolet radiation did not affect yield or cannabinoid content
- Cannabis sativa L.: Crop Management and Abiotic Factors That Affect Phytocannabinoid Production
- Multi-Omics Approaches to Study Molecular Mechanisms in Cannabis sativa
- Industrial Hemp Clone Selection Method under LED Smart Farm Condition Based on CBD Production per Cubic Meter
- Effect of Prolonged Photoperiod on Light-Dependent Photosynthetic Reactions in Cannabis
- Several Pythium species cause crown and root rot on cannabis (Cannabis sativa L., marijuana) plants grown under commercial greenhouse conditions
- Diseases of Cannabis sativa Caused by Diverse Fusarium Species
- Characterization of the Volatile Profiles of Six Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Cultivars
- Effects of intermittent-direct-electric-current (IDC) on growth and content on photosynthetic pigments in hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) (I'm highly skeptical of this stuff)
- Genome-wide polymorphism and genic selection in feral and domesticated lineages of Cannabis sativa
- Research and development of cultivation methods of Cannabis sativa L. to maximize the yield of non-THC bioactive compounds of nutraceutical, cosmeceutical and pharmaceutical interest
- Simple Extraction of Cannabinoids from Female Inflorescences of Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Understanding Sources of Heavy Metals in Cannabis and Hemp: Benefits of a Risk Assessment Strategy (corperate white paper)
- Hemp microgreens as an innovative functional food: Variation in the organic acids, amino acids, polyphenols, and cannabinoids composition of six hemp cultivars
- Characterization of trichome phenotypes to assess maturation and flower development in Cannabis sativa L. (cannabis) by automatic trichome gland analysis
- Effects of short-term environmental stresses on the onset of cannabinoid production in young immature flowers of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Effects of chitin and chitosan on root growth, biochemical defense response1 and exudate proteome of Cannabis sativa
- An Uncertain Middle Ground: Burford Abstention in Federal Cannabis ContractAn Uncertain Middle Ground: Burford Abstention in Federal Cannabis Contract Enforcement Actions Enforcement Actions (legal)
- Amino Acid Supplementation as a Biostimulant in Medical Cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) Plant Nutrition
- Biocontrol Activity of Bacillus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. Against Botrytis cinerea and Other Cannabis Fungal Pathogens
- A Comprehensive Phytochemical Analysis of Terpenes, Polyphenols and Cannabinoids, and Micromorphological Characterization of 9 Commercial Varieties of Cannabis sativa L.
- IMPROVEMENTS TOWARDS DURABLE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES OF HEMP POWDERY MILDEW THROUGH HOST RANGE DETERMINATION, FUNGICIDE USE, AND GENETIC HOST SUSCEPTIBILITY (PhD thesis)
- How does legalising cannabis influence the purchasing choices of cannabis consumers and the modus operandi of illicit cannabis suppliers? (PhD thesis)
- Effect of Potassium (K) Supply on Cannabinoids, Terpenoids and Plant Function in Medical Cannabis
- Impact of Harvest Time and Pruning Technique on Total CBD Concentration and Yield of Medicinal Cannabis
- Effects of Harpin and Flg22 on Growth Enhancement and Pathogen Defense in Cannabis sativa Seedlings
- Nitrogen Source Matters: High NH4/NO3 Ratio Reduces Cannabinoids, Terpenoids, and Yield in Medical Cannabis
- Differentiating Cannabis Products: Drugs, Food, and Supplements
- Chemical profiling of Cannabis varieties cultivated for medical purposes in southeastern Brazil
- An analysis of cannabis home cultivation and associated risks in Canada, before and after legalization
- Recent advances in electrochemical sensor technologies for THC detection—a narrative review
- Whole-genome resequencing of wild and cultivated cannabis reveals the genetic structure and adaptive selection of important traits
- Variation among hemp (Cannabis sativus L.) analytical testing laboratories evinces regulatory and quality control issues for the industry
- CULTIVATING DEVIANCE IN THE MARIJUANA INDUSTRY (legal)
- The Effect of Harvest Date on Temporal Cannabinoid and Biomass Production in the Floral Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Cultivars BaOx and Cherry Wine
- Benefits of Cultivating Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa ssp. sativa) - A versatile plant for a sustainable future. (India)
- Horticultural Management and Environment Control Strategies for Cannabis (Cannabis sativa L.) Cultivation (master thesis)
- Adapting the cultivation of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) to marginal lands: A review
- Ghana’s preparedness to exploit the medicinal value of industrial hemp
- A One-Step Grafting Methodology Can Adjust Stem Morphology and Increase THCA Yield in Medicinal Cannabis
- Analytical Techniques for Phytocannabinoid Profiling of Cannabis and Cannabis-Based Products—A Comprehensive Review
- Facing the Forensic Challenge of Cannabis Regulation: A Methodology for the Differentiation between Hemp and Marijuana Samples
- The Effect of Transplant Date and Plant Spacing on Biomass Production for Floral Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Characterization of the Biological Activity of the Ethanolic Extract from the Roots of Cannabis sativa L. Grown in Aeroponics
- Delineating genetic regulation of cannabinoid biosynthesis during female flower development in Cannabis sativa
- Effects of Cold Temperature and Acclimation on Cold Tolerance and Cannabinoid Profiles of Cannabis sativa L. (Hemp)
- Effect of harvest time on the compositional changes in essential oils, cannabinoids, and waxes of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
- Genetic Evaluation of In Vitro Micropropagated and Regenerated Plants of Cannabis sativa L. Using SSR Molecular Markers
- Analysis of Morphological Traits, Cannabinoid Profiles, THCAS Gene Sequences, and Photosynthesis in Wide and Narrow Leaflet High-Cannabidiol Breeding Populations of Medical Cannabis
- Post-Harvest Operations to Generate High-Quality Medicinal Cannabis Products: A Systemic Review
- Overlooked Influence of Indian Hemp (Cannabis sativa) Cultivation on Soil Physicochemical Fertility of Humid Tropical Agroecosystems: Lowland Soils (Nigeria)
- The Effect of Rotational Cropping of Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) on Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Communities
- Enhancement of growth and Cannabinoids content of hemp (Cannabis sativa) using arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi
- Morpho-physiology and cannabinoid concentrations of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) are affected by potassium fertilisers and microbes under tropical conditions
- Releasing the Full Potential of Cannabis through Biotechnology
- Different Fertility Approaches in Organic Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Production Alter Floral Biomass Yield but Not CBD:THC Ratio
- New Insight into Ornamental Applications of Cannabis: Perspectives and Challenges
- Cannabis Seedlings Inherit Seed-Borne Bioactive and Anti-Fungal Endophytic Bacilli
- Proceedings of the 3rd Australian Industrial Hemp Conference Launceston, 22-25 March 2022 (153 pages, bunch of presentations)
- Suppression of Hemp Powdery Mildew Using Root-Applied Silicon
- THE ROLE AND IMPORTANCE OF THE DECARBOXYLATION PROCESS IN THE PRODUCTION OF QUALITY FULL-SPECTRUM CANNABIS EXTRACT FOR MEDICINAL PURPOSES
- Impact of Harvest Time and Pruning Technique on Total CBD Concentration and Yield of Medicinal Cannabis
- Empirical Evaluation of Inflorescences’ Morphological Attributes for Yield Optimization of Medicinal Cannabis Cultivars
- Non-Invasive and Confirmatory Differentiation of Hermaphrodite from Both Male and Female Cannabis Plants Using a Hand-Held Raman Spectrometer
- Studying the Effects of Waterhemp Competition on Yield and Phytochemical Content of High-cannabidiol Hemp in Plasticulture (using plasticulture for weed control)
- RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY ENABLES HIGHLY ACCURATE DIFFERENTIATION BETWEEN YOUNG MALE AND FEMALE HEMP PLANTS (senior thesis)
- Terpenes and Cannabinoids in Supercritical CO2 Extracts of Industrial Hemp Inflorescences: Optimization of Extraction, Antiradical and Antibacterial Activity
- Growth and dry matter accumulation of three hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) cultivars sown on three dates in Canterbury (New Zealand)
- Physiological and morphological responses of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) to water deficit
- Far-Red Photography for Measuring Plant Growth: A Novel Approach (cannabis was used in study)
- Low-cost Prototype for Automating of Greenhouse Medicinal Cannabis Production Supported by IoT
- Agricultural traceability model based on IoT and Blockchain: Application in industrial hemp production
- Self-Supervised Leaf Segmentation under Complex Lighting Conditions (cannabis growth monitoring system)
- Research on Monitoring Technology of Industrial Cannabis Based on Blockchain and SM Series Cryptographic Algorithm
- Kinetics of CBD, D9 -THC Degradation and Cannabinol Formation in Cannabis Resin at Various Temperature and pH Conditions
- Optimization of the Decarboxylation of Cannabis for Commercial Applications (free download at bottom of page)
- Extraction of Cannabinoids from CBD-Dominant Cannabis Flowers by Supercritical Carbon Dioxide
- Germination of Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) at Different Level of Sodium Chloride and Temperatures
- Postharvest Operations of Cannabis and Their Effect on Cannabinoid Content: A Review
- Methods for characterizing pollen fitness in Cannabis sativa L.
- THC and CBD Fingerprinting of an Elite Cannabis Collection from Iran: Quantifying Diversity to Underpin Future Cannabis Breeding
- Simultaneous Quantification of 17 Cannabinoids in Cannabis Inflorescence by Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry
- Quality control of cannabis inflorescence and oil products: Response factors for the cost-efficient determination of ten cannabinoids by HPLC
- Understanding Cannabis sativa L.: Current Status of Propagation, Use, Legalization, and Haploid-Inducer-Mediated Genetic Engineering
- An Alternative In Vitro Propagation Protocol of Cannabis sativa L. (Cannabaceae) Presenting Efficient Rooting, for Commercial Production
- A Temporary Immersion System to Improve Cannabis sativa Micropropagation
- Impact of Indole-3-butyric Acid Concentration and Formulation and Propagation Environment on Rooting Success of ‘I3’ Hemp by Stem Cuttings
- Glandular trichomes affect mobility and predatory behavior of two aphid predators on medicinal cannabis
- Production of Novel Medicinal Cannabis Using Genome Editing Technology (PhD thesis)
- Response of cannabidiol hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) varieties grown in the southeastern United States to nitrogen fertilization
- Semi-quantitative analysis of cannabinoids in hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) using gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry
- Cannabis entrepreneurship: A guide to core concepts, resources, and research strategies
- Root-TRAPR: a modular plant growth device to visualize root development and monitor growth parameters, as applied to an elicitor response of Cannabis sativa
- Cannabis sativa L. Spectral Discrimination and Classification Using Satellite Imagery and Machine Learning
- Machine Learning-Mediated Development and Optimization of Disinfection Protocol and Scarification Method for Improved In Vitro Germination of Cannabis Seeds
- []()
2022.06.17 09:15 Coyotu Romanul "Ion" scris de mine. Acordati-mi punctaj de la 0 la 30
Romanul este specia genului epic, in proza, cu actiune complexa, numeroase personaje si naratiune ce urmeaza mai multe planuri narative. "Ion" de Liviu Rebreanu, este un roman aparut in anul 1920, intr-o perioada de efervescenta culturala in literatura romana, cand se desfasurau 2 curente literare: Modernismul, promovat de criticul Eugen Lovinescu in revista si la cenaclul "Sburatorul" si traditionalismul promovat de Nechifor Crainic in revista "Gandirea". "Ion" se incadreaza in realist, curent literar ce presupune relatarea evenimentelor intr-o nota realista, veridica, cu cronotopul fixat cu precizie si naratiune intr-un stil sobru, impersonal. Perspectiva narativa este obiectiva, relatata la persoana a III-a :"atarna", "el intra" de catre un narator ce observa realitatea obiectiv si impartial. Naratorul este omniscient, deoarece stie totul despre personaje, ganduri, actiuni si omniprezent intrucat dirijeaza evolutia personajelor conform unui destin bine stabilit, cunoscand dinainte finalul. Naratiunea este heterodiegetica, naratorul povestind obiectiv, viziunea "dindarat" intrucat actiunea este relatata din exterior, iar focalizarea zero. Perspectiva narativa reprezinta punctul de vedere din care este aratata actiunea romanului si totodata arata relatia dintre narator si universul fictional. Timpul si spatiul sunt fixate cu precizie, ceea ce denota caracterul realist. Actiunea se petrece la inceputul secolului al XX-lea in Transilvania aflata sub ocupatie austro-ungara. Intr-o duminica, dupa-amiaza, are loc hora din curtea Teodosiei, vaduva lui Maxim Oprea, prilej pentru narator de a oferi o imagine ampla asupra intregului sat. Incipitul cuprinde descrierea caselor si a personajelor. Tema romanului o constituie iubirea si pamantul, doua modele existentiale pe care personajul Ion le urmeaza. Mama lui Ion, Zenobia adusese zestre, insa tatal acestuia, Glanetasul platise tot pe datorii. Ion creste sarac si cu o dorinta intensa de pamant. In acest univers fictiv, dar aflat intr-o nota verosimila, pamantul ofera maretie si stare sociala. Titlul romanului este simplu, format din numele personajului principal. Ion este protagonistul , iar numele acestuia este inspirat de autor din satul acestuia, de la un baiat de 18 ani ce se plange lui Rebreanu ca nu are pamant, ceea ce ii inspira titlul romanului. Acest fapt este relatat de autor in jurnalul acestuia, "Marturisiri literare". De asemenea, numele Ion este un nume reprezentativ pentru taranul roman. Ion este un personaj viclean ce face tot posibilul pentru a obtine pamant. De aceea, el o lasa insarcinata pe Ana, fiica lui Vasile Baciu pentru a obtine pamantul acestuia. Ion nu se multumeste cu obtinerea pamantului si doreste si iubire. Ion aspira la dragostea Floricai, sotia lui George, fapt ce ii constituie chiar moartea. Relatia incipit-final este construita prin intrarea si iesirea din sat. In incipit, este descrisa intrarea in sat cu o cruce de tinichea ruginita pe care zace un Iisus trist ceea ce denota lipsa religiozitatii in sat. Alternativa stanga-dreapta a Somesului simbolizeaza pendularea personajului principal intre iubire si pamant. In final, este descris din nou satul, de acesta data cu iesirea, iar pe crucea din incipit apare o raza de soare ceea de sugereaza faptul ca Ion si-a gasit linistea doar in pamantul mult iubit. Ion este un personaj complex ce doreste o pozitie sociala inalta pe care doar pamantul i-o poate oferi. Totodata acesta doreste implinirea prin iubire. Acest personaj a oferit diferite opinii in randul criticilor. De exemplu, Eugen Lovinescu spune "Ion este inteligent", iar George Calinescu afirma "Ion este o bruta careia viclenia instinctuala ii tine loc de inteligenta". Romanul "Ion" ofera veridicitate, faptele verosimile nefiind adevarate, dar care se pot intampla. Naratiunea prezinta numele satului in care se petrece actiunea, Pripas, ceea ce sustine veridicitatea romanului. Asadar, "Ion" de Liviu Rebreanu este un roman complex in care se prezinta pendularea personajului principal intre pamant si iubire, intr-o nota realista, romanul avand caracter moralizator.
2021.12.10 04:53 Nahuel_cba El origen de la idea mas estupida del mundo: Milton Friedman.
"The success of the article was not because the arguments were sound or powerful, but rather because people desperately wanted to believe."El exito del articulo no fue porque los argumentos fueran solidos o poderosos, si no mas bien porque la gente desesperadamente queria creer.
The idea of focusing totally on making money, and forgetting about any concerns for employees, customers or society seemed like a promising avenue worth exploring, regardless of the argumentationLa idea de concentrarse solamente en hacer dinero, y olvidarse acerca de cualquier preocupacion por los empleados, los clientes o la sociedad parecia ser un camino que valia la pena explorar, mas alla de la argumentacion.
Underneath impenetrable jargon and abstruse mathematics is the reality that whole intellectual edifice of the famous article rests on the same false assumption as Professor Friedman’s article, namely, that an organization is a legal fiction which doesn’t exist and that the organization’s money is owned by the stockholders.Abajo de la jerga impenetrable y las matematicas dificiles de entender esta la realidad de que toda la edificacion intelectual del famoso articulo descansa sobre la misma falsa asuncion que la del articulo del Profesor Friedman, a saber, que una organizacion es una ficcion legal que no existe y que el dinero de esa organizacion le pertenece a los accionistas
Politics also lent support. Ronald Reagan was elected in the US in 1980 with his message that government is “the problem”. In the UK, Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister in 1979. These leaders preached “economic freedom” and urged a focus on making money as “the solution”.Los politicos tambien prestaron su apoyo. Ronald Reagan fue elegido en los EEUU en 1980 con su mensaje de que el gobierno es "el problema". En el reino unido en 1979, Margaret Thatcher se convirtio en primer ministra. Esos lideres predicaron la "libertad economica" y apuraron a que se concentren en hacer dinero como "la solucion"
The disastrous consequences…Las concecuencias desastrosas...
So for a time, it looked as though the magic of shareholder value was working. But once the financial tricks that were used to support it were uncovered, the underlying reality became apparent. The decline that Friedman and other sensed in 1970 turned out to be real and persistent. The rate of return on assets and on invested capital of US firms declined from 1965 to 2009 by three-quarters, as shown by the Shift Index, a study of 20,000 US firms.
Por un tiempo, parecia que la magia del valor de los accionistas estaba funcionando. Pero una vez que los trucos financieros que fueron usados para sostenerlo se descubrieron, la realidad que estaba debajo se volvio evidente. La caida que Friedman y otros percibieron en 1970 resulto ser real y persistente. La tasa de rotorno de bienes y de capitales invertidos de las firmas de EEUU cayeron desde 1965 a 2009 en tres cuartos, como se ve en el indice de cambios, un estudio de 20.000 firmas de EEUU.
The shareholder value theory thus failed even on its own narrow terms: making money. The proponents of shareholder value and stock-based executive compensation hoped that their theories would focus executives on improving the real performance of their companies and thus increasing shareholder value over time. Yet, precisely the opposite occurred. In the period of shareholder capitalism since 1976, executive compensation has exploded while corporate performance declined.La teoria del valor de los accionistas fallo incluso en sus terminos tan pequeños: hacer dinero. Los defensores del valor de los accionistas y compensaciones ejecutivas en base a las acciones esperaban que sus teorias concentraran a los ejecutivos en mejorar el rendimiento real de sus companias y por lo tanto mejorar el valor de las acciones con el tiempo. Sin embargo, ocurrio precisamente lo opuesto. En el periodo de capitalismo de accionistas desde 1976, la compensaciona los ejecutivos exploto mientras que el rendimiento corporativo decayo.
Maximizing shareholder value thus turned out to be the disease of which it purported to be the cure.
Maximizar el valor de los accionistas entonces resulto ser la enfermedad de lo que se proponia ser la cura.
Al final concluye que la solucion no es una economia focalizada en maximizar los beneficios de los ejecutivos de las empresas si no que es focalizarse en la creacion de nuevos clientes (aka estimular el consumo)
Tambien cita muchas otras empresas que siguieron este modelo exitosamente (como Apple o Amazon) y muchos libros que sostienen el mismo pensamiento.
A todo esto alguno que otro pensara "este zurdo socialista empobrecedor seguro saco este articulo de alguna revista marxista que publicaron en laizquierdadiario.com", mucha sorpresa se llevaran al ver que en realidad fue publicado en la revista Forbes.
2021.11.18 08:52 xartero Istoria Colegiului "M. Eminescu" - Buzau - xArte
– 1919 – pe 8 septembrie apare Decretul-lege nr. 3864, prin care se hotărăște: ”Să se înființeze cu începere de la 1 septembrie, câte o școală secundară de fete în orașele T.Severin, Pitești, Buzău, Brăila, Focșani și Constanța”. – pe 14 septembrie, prin circulara nr. 112985, Ministerul condiționează înființarea școlilor respective de valoarea contribuțiilor materiale locale (clădire, instalații, mobilier). – pe 12 noiembrie încep cursurile cu o singură clasă (I-a), având 63 eleve într-o sală din localul fostei școli primare israelite, de pe strada Dobrogei nr.29, devenită în perioada comunistă strada Dobrogeanu-Gherea, azi denumită Alexandru Marghiloman. Inițial au activat numai două profesoare: Alexandra Maxim (directoare, licențiată în Istorie și Geografie) și Lucia Ionescu (Matematici), titulatura oficială ”Școala secundară de fete din Buzău”. – 1920 – pe 20 iunie se încheie primul an școlar cu următoarele rezultate: dintre 63 eleve promovează integral 60. – 1922 – în ianuarie se refuză terenul oferit de Consiliul Comunal Orășenesc în spatele secției de pompieri, propus pentru local. Se invocă cheltuielile exagerate impuse de friabilitatea subsolului. – în aprilie se achiziționează de la Banca Națională 3000 m.p. teren pe strada Independentei, într-o poziție centrală, lângă Casa Armatei. Ulterior, suprafața destinată construirii unui local propriu va fi întregită cu alte două parcele, ajungând să totalizeze 5160 m.p. Una dintre aceste parcele a fost cumpărată de la succesorii lui Nicolae Vaschide, născut pe strada Independenței la nr. 31, la 5 decembrie 1873 și ajuns director adjunct la Laboratorul de Psihologie medicală de pe lângă Sorbona. – în octombrie se aprobă utilizarea, pe jumătăți de zi, a localului spațios al ”Școlii primare de băieți și fete nr. 1” din Piața Daciei (actuala Șc. Gen. Nr.5 Buzău), unde va rămâne până în 1931. – 1932 – în octombrie, în programa de studiu se adaugă, pe lângă secțiile uman/real, o a treia, secția clasico-modernă, a cărei absolvire dă dreptul la înscrierea în Universitate. – 1925 – pe 10 decembrie are loc solemnitatea depunerii actului de fundație la temelia construcției din strada Independenței nr. 22, actualul local, în prezența ”ministrului școalelor” de atunci, dr. C. Angelescu. Autorul proiectului este arhitectul Paxino, directoare în funcțiune – prof. Vera Teodorescu (Matematici). – 1928 – în aprilie, 20 de eleve însoțite de 18 profesoare întorc vizita unui liceu din Polonia (20 zile). Funcționează liceul unitar cu 7 clase (două secții uman și real). – 1931 – în septembrie, școala se instalează în localul propriu, directoare fiind profesoarele Iosefina Trandaf (Franceză) și Florica Manoilescu (Română-Latină). La 15 noiembrie se termină lucrările începute cu șase ani în urmă, dar clasele și cancelaria se instalează într-o singură aripă (la fațadă, pe aliniamentul străzii). Este de subliniat decorarea holului de la parter și amfiteatrul cu 520 de locuri. – 1934/1948 – Liceul funcționează cu 8 clase pe secții (umană și reală). – În octombrie 1948 ia ființă o asociație sportivă a liceului denumită « Luceafărul ». Din 1949 școala are și curs fără frecvență. Structura anului școlar, ca și sistemul de notare a elevilor, au suferit modificări importante (de la pătrare la trimestre); aprecierea cunoștintelor, de la 5 la 1, cu promovarea prin nota 3, a fost înlocuită cu notarea de la 10 la 1, promovare prin 5). – 1953 – în iunie, examenul de absolvire a cursului mediu liceal a fost înlocuit cu un examen de maturitate și apoi de «bacalaureat». – 1954 – devine directoare a liceului profesoara Clotilda Voinea Constantinescu (specialitatea Biologie). Va rămâne în funcție neîntrerupt până în 1977. Sub îndrumarea ei începe construcția la «scară largă» a sălii de sport, a celeilalte aripe, a laboratoarelor de chimie. – 1957 – în septembrie s-a propus ministerului ca școala să poarte numele «Mihai Eminescu». Solicitarea s-a aprobat cu nr. 2265 din 16 noiembrie a aceluiași an. – 1958 – în aprilie, delegatul Ministerului Învățământului a înmânat conducerii școlii diploma ce o autoriza să încrusteze pe frontispiciu numele poetului național. În marele hol de la intrare (30/12)m, pe peretele din față este așezat portretul patronului spiritual, pictură murală executată de profesoara Elena Beldescu. – 1960/1961 – se execută importante amenajări la aripa stângă (parter și etaj) unde s-au obținut 2 săli de clasă și 4 ateliere, revizuirea integrală a rețelei de termoficare și extinderea acesteia la laboratoarele de Fizică și Chimie. – 1964/1965 – înscrierile la secția fără frecvență ajung la 638 de elevi (cursul de zi era frecventat de 680 elevi). – 1968/1969 – Liceul funcționează cu 33 de clase la cursurile de zi: 9 clase a IX-a, câte 8 clase a X-a, a XI-a și a XII-a. Numărul profesorilor este de 56, dintre aceștia 53 fiind foști elevi ai școlii. Festivitățile deosebite au marcat SĂRBĂTORIREA SEMICENTENARULUI. – 1969 – pe 9 mai apare primul număr al revistei «Năzuințe», avându-i ca profesori coordonatori pe Clotilda Constantinescu, Florentina Dincă, Petre Ștefan, Vasile Cojocaru, Nicolae Ionescu. Revista va continua să apară sub îndrumarea profesorilor Nicolae Catrina și Ion Mănoiu până în 1979 (13 numere). Seria nouă se reia în decembrie 1994 (nr.1) și iunie 1995 (nr.2). – 1974 – se diversifică profilul real prin introducerea secției de Bio-Chimie. – 1974 – se înființează primele laboratoare de limbi străine. – 1977 – localul este grav deteriorat de cutremur. Școala se mută pentru 5 trimestre în localul ”Olga Baci”. Din cauza consolidării precare și a lipsei de spațiu, biblioteca monumentală de la etaj ”coboară” la parter lângă cancelarie și primele laboratoare de limbi străine. – 1979 – încep construcțiile pentru localul anexă (ateliere-școală, secția Mecanică și Industrie ușoară). – 1988 – în aprilie, etapa națională a Olimpiadei de Istorie se desfășoară la Buzău în ”Liceul de Filologie – Istorie ”Mihai Eminescu”. – 1991 – liceul primește titulatura ”Liceul Teoretic Mihai Eminescu”. 1994 – are loc ”Jubileul celor 75 de ani de existență”. Actualele clase a XII-a sunt declarate GENERAȚIA JUBILEU. – 1997/1998 – în liceu sunt 48 de clase cu 1379 de elevi: cursuri liceale (45 de clase) și 92 de elevi la gimnaziu (3 clase). Personalul de predare este de 89 de cadre didactice, dintre care 78 de titulari, iar personalul auxiliar este de 34. Dintre profesorii actuali, 30 sunt foști elevi: Română – 9, Latină – 4, Franceză – 2, Engleză – 3, Istorio-Socio-Uman – 3, Matematică – 1, Chimie – 3, Biologie – 1, Geografie – 2, Stenodactilografie – 1, Educație fizică – 1. – 1999/2000 – în liceu sunt 52 de clase cu 1479 elevi, cursuri liceale 47 clase, cursuri gimnaziale 5 clase. Personalul de predare este de 106 cadre didactice, dintre care titularii 76, personalul nedidactic 32. – 2000 – în septembrie, Ministerul Educației Naționale atribuie denumirea de Colegiul Național ”Mihai Eminescu”. – 2000/2001 – în Colegiu sunt 54 de clase cu 1529 de elevi, cursuri liceale 48 de clase, cursuri gimnaziale 6 clase, personalul de predare cuprinde 98 cadre didactice, dintre care 77 titulari (cu gradul I – 48, cu gradul II -10), iar personalul nedidactic este în număr de 30 de persoane. – 2001/2002 – Colegiul funcționează cu un număr de 55 de clase cu 1559 de elevi, dintre care 48 de clase de liceu și 7 clase de gimnaziu. Personalul didactic număra 108 profesori, iar cel nedidactic, 30. În anul școlar 2002 a avut loc ultima reparație capitală a localului colegiului. – 2002/2003 – Colegiul funcționează cu un număr record de clase, 56, dintre care 7 de gimnaziu, cu 196 de elevi, și 49 de liceu, cu 1414 elevi, un număr total de 1610 elevi. Numărul cadrelor didactice este de 103, dintre care 78 sunt titulare și peste 50 sunt cu gradul didactic I, iar personalul nedidactic este în număr de 33 persoane. – 2003/2004 – Colegiul funcționează cu 46 clase de liceu și 6 clase de gimnaziu, cu un număr total de 1507 elevi înscriși, rămași la sfârșitul cursurilor 1484, toți promovați. A fost anul școlar când s-au sărbătorit 85 de ani de la înființarea școlii. – 2004/2005 – școala a fost încadrată cu un număr de 80 de cadre didactice, dintre care 70 titulare și 10 suplinitoare au pregătit un număr de 1436 de elevi (4 clase de gimnaziu, 46 clase de liceu). – 2006/2007 – Colegiul funcționează cu 47 clase de liceu și gimnaziu, cu un număr total de 1316 elevi rămași înscriși. De pregătirea acestora s-au ocupat 85 cadre didactice, dintre care 56 cu gradul didactic I, 10 cu gradul II, 15 cu gradul definitiv și 4 debutanți. A fost schimbată echipa managerială și constituit un nou Consiliu de administrație, condus de Dan Dudaș în calitate de director și Iuliana Dobru ca director adjunct. Începând cu anul 2006, școala dispune de 2 laboratoare de Chimie, unul de Fizică, unul de Biologie, 2 laboratoare fonice, 2 laboratoare de Informatică, o sală multimedia, 24 săli de clasă, o bibliotecă cu peste 35000 de volume, amfiteatrul cu 400 de locuri, internat și cantină cu 60 de locuri, o sală de sport. S-au achiziționat cărți noi pentru bilbliotecă, calculatoare și aparate audio-video, aparate și ecrane de proiecție, jaluzele verticale pentru toată școala și s-a înlocuit tâmplăria veche și deteriorată cu una nouă, fapte care au condus la îmbunătățirea condițiilor pentru desfășurarea tuturor activităților. – 2008/2009 – Colegiul funcționează cu un număr de 45 clase de liceu și gimnaziu, pentru 1217 elevi. De pregătirea acestora s-au ocupat 73 cadre didactice, 11 personal auxiliar, 22 personal de întreținere și operațional. Se adoptă noua uniformă școlară. – 2009/2010 – An școlar care a marcat o istorie de 90 de ani a școlii. Colegiul funcționează cu 82 cadre didactice (69 titulari, 13 suplinitori), toate cu o calificare foarte bună (2 cu doctorat, 60 cu gradul I, 7 cu gradul II, 12 cu definitivat și 3 stagiari), obținând rezultate excelente. – 2010/2011 – a fost acreditat Bacalaureatul francofon. Elevii din clasa a IX-a, profil Uman bilingv și Matematică-Informatică au intrat în acest program care presupune studiul în limba franceză a disciplinelor: Matematică, Informatică, Chimie, Fizică, Geografie, Istorie. Diploma de bacalaureat se eliberează de Ambasada Franței la București. În acest an școlar, 2021, în cadrul școlii s-au derulat 23 proiecte educative în care s-au implicat un număr mare de elevi și cadre didactice. Multe dintre ele s-au desfășurat și în anii anteriori și vor fi continuate, bucurându-se de rezultate și aprecieri din partea elevilor. – 2011/2012 – efectivul de elevi a fost de 1342, dintre care 98 la gimnaziu și 1244 la liceu, în total 47 de clase, la care au predat 75 de cadre didactice. În acest an școlar, Colegiul Național ”Mihai Eminescu” a fost supus unei evaluări externe de către Agenția Română de Acreditare a Calității în Învățământul Preuniversitar, obținând calificativele “Foarte Bine” și “Excelent” la un număr de 24 de indicatori de performanță. – 2012/2013 – Colegiul funcționează cu 46 clase, dintre care 4 de gimnaziu și 42 de liceu, cu 1332 elevi – 108 la gimnaziu și 1224 la liceu. Corpul didactic a fost constituit din 70 de profesori, personalul auxiliar 11 persoane, cel de întreținere și operativ număra 15 persoane . – 2013/2014 – Colegiul funcționează cu un număr de 45 clase, dintre care 4 de gimnaziu și 41 de liceu, cu 1294 elevi – 93 la gimnaziu și 1201 la liceu. Corpul didactic a fost constituit din 79 de profesori, personalul auxiliar 11 persoane, cel de întreținere și operativ 15 persoane. – 2014/2015 – Colegiul funcționează cu un număr de 46 clase, 4 de gimnaziu și 42 de liceu, cu 1297 elevi – 102 la gimnaziu și 1195 la liceu. Corpul didactic a fost constituit din 77 de profesori, personalul auxiliar 11 persoane, cel de întreținere și operativ 15 persoane. – 2015/2016 – Colegiul funcționează cu 44 clase, 4 de gimnaziu și 40 de liceu, cu un total de 1280 elevi – 103 la gimnaziu și 1224 la liceu. Corpul didactic a fost constituit din 79 de profesori, personalul auxiliar 9 persoane, cel de întreținere și operativ 12 persoane. – 2016/2017 – Colegiul funcționează cu 43 clase, 3 de gimnaziu și 40 de liceu, cu 1276 elevi, din care 99 la gimnaziu și 1177 la liceu. Corpul didactic a fost constituit din 72 de profesori, cu 65 titulari, personalul auxiliar 8 persoane, cel de întreținere și operativ 12 persoane.
submitted by xartero to u/xartero [link] [comments]
2021.03.20 07:23 4way-technologies DevOps Managed Services
http://forum.hamienet.com/index.iva?i=23&p=55857#55857
https://naszdompolska.fc.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=73
https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/member.php?305976-susanwilsons
http://e-revista.unioeste.bindex.php/tempodaciencia/comment/view/443/0/714463
https://hulafrog.com/pasadena-clear-lake-tx/devops-consulting-services
http://prahafondy.ami.cz/cz/navstevni-kniha.html?jmeno=DevOps%20Managed%20Services&email=info.4waytechnologies@gmail.com&web=https://4waytechnologies.com/technology/cloud-migration-services/devops-consulting-services/
http://hanabilkova.svet-stranek.cz/vaserecepty/
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=2115965,2115965
https://susan12.wodemo.com/entry/536349
https://carnivores.rivido.de/index.php?site=news_comments&newsID=9
https://huzzaz.com/collection/devops-managed-services
https://myspace.windows93.net/index.php?id=67501
https://classic.fanstory.com/mypage.jsp?userid=924454
http://www.rockhousemethod.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23969
http://www.schippers.mijnwebserver.nl/index.php?option=com_easygb&Itemid=99999&mosmsg=Je+bericht+is+toegevoegd
https://next.theduckwebcomics.com/usesusanwilson/
https://popaholics.net/index.php?action=profile;u=594120
http://forum.miccedu.ru/use52496/
https://sistacafe.com/curators/311483
https://georgia.travel/community/discussion/general/write-my-research-paper-cheap?page=2#_
https://www.buyandsellph.com/item/476826/devops-managed-services
https://ejurnal.plm.ac.id/index.php/Teknovasi/comment/view/304/0/2036
http://smotra.ru/users/susanwilson/
https://4waytechnologies.simigos.com/content/textpages/20936
http://www.voyance-gratuite-telephone.com/voyance/voyance.php?prenom=
http://tver.en.cx/Guestbook/Messages.aspx?fmode=gb&topic=313088&page=1&anchor#7768252
http://www.retrogames.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showprofile.pl?User=susanwilson&Number=86310&Board=retrogen&what=showpost&page=0&view=expanded&mode=threaded&sb=7
https://user.linkdata.org/use4_Way_Technologies/work
https://lmsmaster.simplek12.com/scripts/student/profile/view.asp?id=1868775
https://www.static.zycie.pl/forum/post/11256,nowy-sprzet-dla-strazakow-i-wizyta-ministra
https://www.stereokiller.com/Boards/412558
https://forum.jamkazam.com/member.php?action=profile&uid=7714
https://acos.tym.sk/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=340
https://backloggery.com/susanwilson
http://sites.estvideo.net/alvasoft/forum/profile-15045.html
https://elclasificado.com/bakersfield/servicio/otros-servicios-generales/devops-consulting-services-17815046
https://pridenet.springfieldcollege.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/WSCB_899/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=06240753-8e82-4f72-956d-5df9d6eac5c8&p=2
https://www.sideprojectors.com/project/21354/devops-consulting-services
https://mycapitol.captechu.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/CapVets/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=b2f76aac-2539-4aa6-a445-784fcc1012ec&p=5
https://forums.outdoorsmagic.com/member.php/725666-susanwilson
http://www.renderedideas.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=53924&sid=5b174a70139a197e27fdfb2496f130f9
https://beautyreview.live/next-level-diy-makeup-hacks-for-you/#comment-62417
http://forum.ideesmaison.com/susanwilson-u172646.html
https://www.medstartr.com/profile/21594-susan-wilson
https://mycampus.lourdes.edu/web/63033/readers-nook/-/message_boards/message/2262023/maximized?doAsUserId=RkXRZ3lzVSc%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F168761%2Fmaximized%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F249940%2Fmaximized#_19_message_2262023
http://trosky.cz/rajnet/web/forum.asp
https://deploygate.com/users/susanwilson
https://my.sterling.edu/ICS/Academics/LL/LL379__UG10/FA_2010_UNDG-LL379__UG10_-A/Collaboration.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=773ee664-75f0-4e00-91b6-68bdacfeeb5f
https://theq.qcc.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Anime__Gaming_Club/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=25fc563d-a98e-4afb-881b-1dd891e5d1cc&p=10
http://forum.ubuntu.ro/profile.php?id=57909
https://www.cytaty.info/autosusanwilson.htm
https://lid.decidim.barcelona/profiles/susanwilson/groups?locale=en
http://forum.lilithgame.com/viewtopic.php?t=522785
https://www.isarms.com/forums/members/susanwilson.html
https://rhopa.navigatingcare.com/discussions/devops-managed-services
https://www.neondragon.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=26446
https://www.allsquaregolf.com/golf-users/susan-wilson
http://www.leadclub.net/classifieds/useprofile/382582
https://forum.oliverpelly.lmu.build/showthread.php?tid=317780
https://forum.cyberctm.com/space-uid-587830.html
http://mail.paysdesvallees.be/susanwilson
http://stellamusik.dashosting.de/profile.php?lookup=37348
http://www.nissanownersclub.wix.ph/forum/topic/175696
https://my.svu.edu/ICS/_portletview_/My_Pages/Guest_One.jnz?portlet=Forums_12&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=93c0fd63-d32b-4bb2-a34b-ca62352f3cea#93c0fd63-d32b-4bb2-a34b-ca62352f3cea
https://forum.gekko.wizb.it/user-6941.html
https://vestnikramn.spr-journal.ru/joucomment/view/788/120/5156
https://www.esenthel.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=8989&pid=57924#pid57924
https://decidim.calafell.cat/profiles/susanwilson/timeline
http://ruspioner.ru/profile/view/45328
http://www.oranjo.eu/c/tech/150567/devops-consulting-services
http://www.dungdong.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=1814053
http://forum.trackmaniaforever.com/use80587-susanwilson/
http://www.rynekinstalacyjny.pl/profil?login=susanwilson
https://www.daboombap.com/forum/devops-consulting-services
http://com.domhold.com/4waytechnologies.com
http://dahlan.unimal.ac.id/guestbook.html
https://forum.codelyoko.fprofile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7975
https://forums.footballwebpages.co.uk/dulwich/article/7435
http://www.alcohol-injection.com/forum/members/susanwilson.html
http://www.lib.krsu.edu.kg/index.php?name=news&op=view&id=27#531881
https://www.goclixy.com/user?id=1869
https://gettogether.community/profile/23657/
https://portal.asun.edu/ICS/Academics/UNIV/UNIV__1001/141T-UNIV__1001-J5_31/Discussion_Forum.jnz?portlet=Discussion_Forum&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=033524b7-2296-4cad-80a0-1eac895582c9
http://support.sharepoint.apptix.net/Lists/Advanced%20Technical%20Help/DispForm.aspx?ID=14210&Source=http%3A%2F%2Fsupport%2Esharepoint%2Eapptix%2Enet%2FLists%2FAdvanced%2520Technical%2520Help%2FAllItems%2Easpx
https://support.kotobee.com/en/support/tickets/35894
https://www.bloggymoms.com/members/susanwilson/
http://conference.mdpu.org.ua/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=793336
https://usa.life/susanwilsons
https://agoracom.com/members/susanwilson
http://rusarhiiv.pohjarannik.ee/user.php?op=userinfo&bypass=1&uname=susanwilson
https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/devops-managed-services-216354.asp
https://www.scribay.com/autho485199067/susanwilson
http://www.clubaffiliation.com/forum/user-3789.html
https://www.backdorf.de/forum/member.php?action=profile&uid=3435
https://pawpass.iavalley.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Ellworth_Community_College/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=759858ac-cdd8-4625-8541-5ea5d3d8cd72
http://jurnal.iainponorogo.ac.id/index.php/pustakaloka/comment/view/1235/918/42657
https://www.svenskbandy.se/BANDY-INFO/UTBILDNING/Bandyburken/Gastbok
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/member.php?127228-susanwilson
https://moztw.hackpad.tw/DevOps-Managed-Services-LhrWjFePk9D
http://forum.bokser.org/user-532832.html
https://forum.moomba.com/member.php?66790-susanwilson
https://therapyquestionmark.co.uk/forum/member.php?action=profile&uid=22237
http://m.activatica.org/blogs/view/id/12246/title/devops-managed-services
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/member.php?96094-susanwilson
submitted by 4way-technologies to u/4way-technologies [link] [comments]
https://naszdompolska.fc.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=73
https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/member.php?305976-susanwilsons
http://e-revista.unioeste.bindex.php/tempodaciencia/comment/view/443/0/714463
https://hulafrog.com/pasadena-clear-lake-tx/devops-consulting-services
http://prahafondy.ami.cz/cz/navstevni-kniha.html?jmeno=DevOps%20Managed%20Services&email=info.4waytechnologies@gmail.com&web=https://4waytechnologies.com/technology/cloud-migration-services/devops-consulting-services/
http://hanabilkova.svet-stranek.cz/vaserecepty/
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=2115965,2115965
https://susan12.wodemo.com/entry/536349
https://carnivores.rivido.de/index.php?site=news_comments&newsID=9
https://huzzaz.com/collection/devops-managed-services
https://myspace.windows93.net/index.php?id=67501
https://classic.fanstory.com/mypage.jsp?userid=924454
http://www.rockhousemethod.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23969
http://www.schippers.mijnwebserver.nl/index.php?option=com_easygb&Itemid=99999&mosmsg=Je+bericht+is+toegevoegd
https://next.theduckwebcomics.com/usesusanwilson/
https://popaholics.net/index.php?action=profile;u=594120
http://forum.miccedu.ru/use52496/
https://sistacafe.com/curators/311483
https://georgia.travel/community/discussion/general/write-my-research-paper-cheap?page=2#_
https://www.buyandsellph.com/item/476826/devops-managed-services
https://ejurnal.plm.ac.id/index.php/Teknovasi/comment/view/304/0/2036
http://smotra.ru/users/susanwilson/
https://4waytechnologies.simigos.com/content/textpages/20936
http://www.voyance-gratuite-telephone.com/voyance/voyance.php?prenom=
http://tver.en.cx/Guestbook/Messages.aspx?fmode=gb&topic=313088&page=1&anchor#7768252
http://www.retrogames.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showprofile.pl?User=susanwilson&Number=86310&Board=retrogen&what=showpost&page=0&view=expanded&mode=threaded&sb=7
https://user.linkdata.org/use4_Way_Technologies/work
https://lmsmaster.simplek12.com/scripts/student/profile/view.asp?id=1868775
https://www.static.zycie.pl/forum/post/11256,nowy-sprzet-dla-strazakow-i-wizyta-ministra
https://www.stereokiller.com/Boards/412558
https://forum.jamkazam.com/member.php?action=profile&uid=7714
https://acos.tym.sk/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=340
https://backloggery.com/susanwilson
http://sites.estvideo.net/alvasoft/forum/profile-15045.html
https://elclasificado.com/bakersfield/servicio/otros-servicios-generales/devops-consulting-services-17815046
https://pridenet.springfieldcollege.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/WSCB_899/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=06240753-8e82-4f72-956d-5df9d6eac5c8&p=2
https://www.sideprojectors.com/project/21354/devops-consulting-services
https://mycapitol.captechu.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/CapVets/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=b2f76aac-2539-4aa6-a445-784fcc1012ec&p=5
https://forums.outdoorsmagic.com/member.php/725666-susanwilson
http://www.renderedideas.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=53924&sid=5b174a70139a197e27fdfb2496f130f9
https://beautyreview.live/next-level-diy-makeup-hacks-for-you/#comment-62417
http://forum.ideesmaison.com/susanwilson-u172646.html
https://www.medstartr.com/profile/21594-susan-wilson
https://mycampus.lourdes.edu/web/63033/readers-nook/-/message_boards/message/2262023/maximized?doAsUserId=RkXRZ3lzVSc%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F168761%2Fmaximized%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F249940%2Fmaximized#_19_message_2262023
http://trosky.cz/rajnet/web/forum.asp
https://deploygate.com/users/susanwilson
https://my.sterling.edu/ICS/Academics/LL/LL379__UG10/FA_2010_UNDG-LL379__UG10_-A/Collaboration.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=773ee664-75f0-4e00-91b6-68bdacfeeb5f
https://theq.qcc.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Anime__Gaming_Club/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=25fc563d-a98e-4afb-881b-1dd891e5d1cc&p=10
http://forum.ubuntu.ro/profile.php?id=57909
https://www.cytaty.info/autosusanwilson.htm
https://lid.decidim.barcelona/profiles/susanwilson/groups?locale=en
http://forum.lilithgame.com/viewtopic.php?t=522785
https://www.isarms.com/forums/members/susanwilson.html
https://rhopa.navigatingcare.com/discussions/devops-managed-services
https://www.neondragon.net/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=26446
https://www.allsquaregolf.com/golf-users/susan-wilson
http://www.leadclub.net/classifieds/useprofile/382582
https://forum.oliverpelly.lmu.build/showthread.php?tid=317780
https://forum.cyberctm.com/space-uid-587830.html
http://mail.paysdesvallees.be/susanwilson
http://stellamusik.dashosting.de/profile.php?lookup=37348
http://www.nissanownersclub.wix.ph/forum/topic/175696
https://my.svu.edu/ICS/_portletview_/My_Pages/Guest_One.jnz?portlet=Forums_12&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=93c0fd63-d32b-4bb2-a34b-ca62352f3cea#93c0fd63-d32b-4bb2-a34b-ca62352f3cea
https://forum.gekko.wizb.it/user-6941.html
https://vestnikramn.spr-journal.ru/joucomment/view/788/120/5156
https://www.esenthel.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=8989&pid=57924#pid57924
https://decidim.calafell.cat/profiles/susanwilson/timeline
http://ruspioner.ru/profile/view/45328
http://www.oranjo.eu/c/tech/150567/devops-consulting-services
http://www.dungdong.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=1814053
http://forum.trackmaniaforever.com/use80587-susanwilson/
http://www.rynekinstalacyjny.pl/profil?login=susanwilson
https://www.daboombap.com/forum/devops-consulting-services
http://com.domhold.com/4waytechnologies.com
http://dahlan.unimal.ac.id/guestbook.html
https://forum.codelyoko.fprofile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7975
https://forums.footballwebpages.co.uk/dulwich/article/7435
http://www.alcohol-injection.com/forum/members/susanwilson.html
http://www.lib.krsu.edu.kg/index.php?name=news&op=view&id=27#531881
https://www.goclixy.com/user?id=1869
https://gettogether.community/profile/23657/
https://portal.asun.edu/ICS/Academics/UNIV/UNIV__1001/141T-UNIV__1001-J5_31/Discussion_Forum.jnz?portlet=Discussion_Forum&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=033524b7-2296-4cad-80a0-1eac895582c9
http://support.sharepoint.apptix.net/Lists/Advanced%20Technical%20Help/DispForm.aspx?ID=14210&Source=http%3A%2F%2Fsupport%2Esharepoint%2Eapptix%2Enet%2FLists%2FAdvanced%2520Technical%2520Help%2FAllItems%2Easpx
https://support.kotobee.com/en/support/tickets/35894
https://www.bloggymoms.com/members/susanwilson/
http://conference.mdpu.org.ua/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=793336
https://usa.life/susanwilsons
https://agoracom.com/members/susanwilson
http://rusarhiiv.pohjarannik.ee/user.php?op=userinfo&bypass=1&uname=susanwilson
https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/devops-managed-services-216354.asp
https://www.scribay.com/autho485199067/susanwilson
http://www.clubaffiliation.com/forum/user-3789.html
https://www.backdorf.de/forum/member.php?action=profile&uid=3435
https://pawpass.iavalley.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Ellworth_Community_College/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=759858ac-cdd8-4625-8541-5ea5d3d8cd72
http://jurnal.iainponorogo.ac.id/index.php/pustakaloka/comment/view/1235/918/42657
https://www.svenskbandy.se/BANDY-INFO/UTBILDNING/Bandyburken/Gastbok
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/member.php?127228-susanwilson
https://moztw.hackpad.tw/DevOps-Managed-Services-LhrWjFePk9D
http://forum.bokser.org/user-532832.html
https://forum.moomba.com/member.php?66790-susanwilson
https://therapyquestionmark.co.uk/forum/member.php?action=profile&uid=22237
http://m.activatica.org/blogs/view/id/12246/title/devops-managed-services
https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/forum/member.php?96094-susanwilson
2021.03.13 08:41 4way-technologies DevOps Managed Services
https://www.yourememberthat.com/profile.php?user=susanwilson&act=profile_blogs&action=view&id=23854
http://fanfic.castletv.net/viewuser.php?uid=14801
http://www.svidnik.rimkat.sk/news.php?readmore=409&c_start=15370#c15376
https://tours.onvasortir.com/profil_read.php?Susanwilson
https://got.vg/topic/48073/
https://my.umary.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Academic_Test_Group/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=63aff51e-4c46-4749-9d29-c6b82bdc4ec5&p=5
https://compass.centralmethodist.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Allied_Health_Bldg__Conference_Room_Schedule/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=242b27f6-7930-4552-9e08-d8bdb095c8b9&p=3
http://elitecaretreatment.com/discussions/https-www-posts123-com-post-334833-http-www-supplementalreviews-com-alpha-evolution-vital-keto#reply-9982
https://hub.toot.cat/thing/0e711c5213b406f8ad2e58a1b432d4bfd8b9c6ba0e12a2a9aa9ef39327b2f977
http://www.magnusbrading.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?s=77f08beba9be91f9ed961f2d6d37e55e;act=ST;f=8;t=8112;r=1;&#top
http://www.moviestorm.co.uk/community?u=susanwilsons
http://kw.pm.org/wiki/index.cgi?susanwilsonhttp://p106906.typo3server.info/45.0.htmlhttps://jurnal.uns.ac.id/ijpte/authosubmission/49119https://techmoran.com/authosusanwilson/http://gloria.bk-ninja.com/forums/users/susanwilson/http://www.alice.org/forums/member.php?u=53088
http://virtualplant.bio.puc.cl/twiki/bin/view/Main/SusanWilson
http://old.skolskesestryosf.rehola.sk/index.php/kniha-modlitby?limitstart=0
https://globalmusculoskeletal.tghn.org/community/members/384394/
https://demo.socialengine.com/profile/1008
http://www.blenderturkiye.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=710398
https://www.omgserv.com/en/forum/profile/5569https://www.turistika.cz/turiste/profil/273127https://ibbs.uu.cc/?4688398https://feedback.bistudio.com/p/susanwilson/
https://forum.zenstudios.com/member.php?3189357-susanwilson
http://media.podolsk.ru/member.php?action=showprofile&user_id=34416
https://www.netcontact.at/cgi-sys/gb.cgi?entry=1
https://tiger.voorhees.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Campus_Actitvities/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=6c2e216d-9532-4c9c-a4f8-df1fb3605133&p=5
https://my.bankstreet.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Child_Life_Program/Group_Collaboration.jnz?portlet=%5bICS%5d_ForumPortlet&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=0c004ce0-bce9-491a-ba49-b08321c409c8
http://www.technologijos.lt/diskusijos/viewtopic.php?p=568060#p568060
http://forum.hamienet.com/index.iva?i=23&p=55857#55857
https://naszdompolska.fc.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=73
https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/member.php?305976-susanwilsons
http://e-revista.unioeste.bindex.php/tempodaciencia/comment/view/443/0/714463
https://hulafrog.com/pasadena-clear-lake-tx/devops-consulting-services
http://prahafondy.ami.cz/cz/navstevni-kniha.html?jmeno=DevOps%20Managed%20Services&email=info.4waytechnologies@gmail.com&web=https://4waytechnologies.com/technology/cloud-migration-services/devops-consulting-services/
http://hanabilkova.svet-stranek.cz/vaserecepty/
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=2115965,2115965
https://susan12.wodemo.com/entry/536349
https://carnivores.rivido.de/index.php?site=news_comments&newsID=9
https://huzzaz.com/collection/devops-managed-services
https://myspace.windows93.net/index.php?id=67501
https://classic.fanstory.com/mypage.jsp?userid=924454
http://www.rockhousemethod.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23969
http://www.schippers.mijnwebserver.nl/index.php?option=com_easygb&Itemid=99999&mosmsg=Je+bericht+is+toegevoegd
https://next.theduckwebcomics.com/usesusanwilson/
https://popaholics.net/index.php?action=profile;u=594120
http://forum.miccedu.ru/use52496/https://sistacafe.com/curators/311483
https://georgia.travel/community/discussion/general/write-my-research-paper-cheap?page=2#_
https://www.buyandsellph.com/item/476826/devops-managed-services
https://ejurnal.plm.ac.id/index.php/Teknovasi/comment/view/304/0/2036
http://smotra.ru/users/susanwilson/
https://4waytechnologies.simigos.com/content/textpages/20936
http://www.voyance-gratuite-telephone.com/voyance/voyance.php?prenom=
http://tver.en.cx/Guestbook/Messages.aspx?fmode=gb&topic=313088&page=1&anchor#7768252
http://www.retrogames.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showprofile.pl?User=susanwilson&Number=86310&Board=retrogen&what=showpost&page=0&view=expanded&mode=threaded&sb=7
https://user.linkdata.org/use4_Way_Technologies/work
https://lmsmaster.simplek12.com/scripts/student/profile/view.asp?id=1868775
https://www.static.zycie.pl/forum/post/11256,nowy-sprzet-dla-strazakow-i-wizyta-ministra
https://www.stereokiller.com/Boards/412558
https://forum.jamkazam.com/member.php?action=profile&uid=7714
https://acos.tym.sk/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=340
https://backloggery.com/susanwilson
http://sites.estvideo.net/alvasoft/forum/profile-15045.html
https://elclasificado.com/bakersfield/servicio/otros-servicios-generales/devops-consulting-services-17815046
https://pridenet.springfieldcollege.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/WSCB_899/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=06240753-8e82-4f72-956d-5df9d6eac5c8&p=2
https://www.sideprojectors.com/project/21354/devops-consulting-services
https://mycapitol.captechu.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/CapVets/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=b2f76aac-2539-4aa6-a445-784fcc1012ec&p=5
https://forums.outdoorsmagic.com/member.php/725666-susanwilson
http://www.renderedideas.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=53924&sid=5b174a70139a197e27fdfb2496f130f9
https://beautyreview.live/next-level-diy-makeup-hacks-for-you/#comment-62417
http://forum.ideesmaison.com/susanwilson-u172646.html
https://www.medstartr.com/profile/21594-susan-wilson
https://mycampus.lourdes.edu/web/63033/readers-nook/-/message_boards/message/2262023/maximized?doAsUserId=RkXRZ3lzVSc%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F168761%2Fmaximized%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F249940%2Fmaximized#_19_message_2262023
submitted by 4way-technologies to u/4way-technologies [link] [comments]
http://fanfic.castletv.net/viewuser.php?uid=14801
http://www.svidnik.rimkat.sk/news.php?readmore=409&c_start=15370#c15376
https://tours.onvasortir.com/profil_read.php?Susanwilson
https://got.vg/topic/48073/
https://my.umary.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Academic_Test_Group/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=63aff51e-4c46-4749-9d29-c6b82bdc4ec5&p=5
https://compass.centralmethodist.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Allied_Health_Bldg__Conference_Room_Schedule/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=242b27f6-7930-4552-9e08-d8bdb095c8b9&p=3
http://elitecaretreatment.com/discussions/https-www-posts123-com-post-334833-http-www-supplementalreviews-com-alpha-evolution-vital-keto#reply-9982
https://hub.toot.cat/thing/0e711c5213b406f8ad2e58a1b432d4bfd8b9c6ba0e12a2a9aa9ef39327b2f977
http://www.magnusbrading.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.cgi?s=77f08beba9be91f9ed961f2d6d37e55e;act=ST;f=8;t=8112;r=1;&#top
http://www.moviestorm.co.uk/community?u=susanwilsons
http://kw.pm.org/wiki/index.cgi?susanwilsonhttp://p106906.typo3server.info/45.0.htmlhttps://jurnal.uns.ac.id/ijpte/authosubmission/49119https://techmoran.com/authosusanwilson/http://gloria.bk-ninja.com/forums/users/susanwilson/http://www.alice.org/forums/member.php?u=53088
http://virtualplant.bio.puc.cl/twiki/bin/view/Main/SusanWilson
http://old.skolskesestryosf.rehola.sk/index.php/kniha-modlitby?limitstart=0
https://globalmusculoskeletal.tghn.org/community/members/384394/
https://demo.socialengine.com/profile/1008
http://www.blenderturkiye.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=710398
https://www.omgserv.com/en/forum/profile/5569https://www.turistika.cz/turiste/profil/273127https://ibbs.uu.cc/?4688398https://feedback.bistudio.com/p/susanwilson/
https://forum.zenstudios.com/member.php?3189357-susanwilson
http://media.podolsk.ru/member.php?action=showprofile&user_id=34416
https://www.netcontact.at/cgi-sys/gb.cgi?entry=1
https://tiger.voorhees.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Campus_Actitvities/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=6c2e216d-9532-4c9c-a4f8-df1fb3605133&p=5
https://my.bankstreet.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/Child_Life_Program/Group_Collaboration.jnz?portlet=%5bICS%5d_ForumPortlet&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=0c004ce0-bce9-491a-ba49-b08321c409c8
http://www.technologijos.lt/diskusijos/viewtopic.php?p=568060#p568060
http://forum.hamienet.com/index.iva?i=23&p=55857#55857
https://naszdompolska.fc.pl/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=73
https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/member.php?305976-susanwilsons
http://e-revista.unioeste.bindex.php/tempodaciencia/comment/view/443/0/714463
https://hulafrog.com/pasadena-clear-lake-tx/devops-consulting-services
http://prahafondy.ami.cz/cz/navstevni-kniha.html?jmeno=DevOps%20Managed%20Services&email=info.4waytechnologies@gmail.com&web=https://4waytechnologies.com/technology/cloud-migration-services/devops-consulting-services/
http://hanabilkova.svet-stranek.cz/vaserecepty/
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=2115965,2115965
https://susan12.wodemo.com/entry/536349
https://carnivores.rivido.de/index.php?site=news_comments&newsID=9
https://huzzaz.com/collection/devops-managed-services
https://myspace.windows93.net/index.php?id=67501
https://classic.fanstory.com/mypage.jsp?userid=924454
http://www.rockhousemethod.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=23969
http://www.schippers.mijnwebserver.nl/index.php?option=com_easygb&Itemid=99999&mosmsg=Je+bericht+is+toegevoegd
https://next.theduckwebcomics.com/usesusanwilson/
https://popaholics.net/index.php?action=profile;u=594120
http://forum.miccedu.ru/use52496/https://sistacafe.com/curators/311483
https://georgia.travel/community/discussion/general/write-my-research-paper-cheap?page=2#_
https://www.buyandsellph.com/item/476826/devops-managed-services
https://ejurnal.plm.ac.id/index.php/Teknovasi/comment/view/304/0/2036
http://smotra.ru/users/susanwilson/
https://4waytechnologies.simigos.com/content/textpages/20936
http://www.voyance-gratuite-telephone.com/voyance/voyance.php?prenom=
http://tver.en.cx/Guestbook/Messages.aspx?fmode=gb&topic=313088&page=1&anchor#7768252
http://www.retrogames.com/cgi-bin/wwwthreads/showprofile.pl?User=susanwilson&Number=86310&Board=retrogen&what=showpost&page=0&view=expanded&mode=threaded&sb=7
https://user.linkdata.org/use4_Way_Technologies/work
https://lmsmaster.simplek12.com/scripts/student/profile/view.asp?id=1868775
https://www.static.zycie.pl/forum/post/11256,nowy-sprzet-dla-strazakow-i-wizyta-ministra
https://www.stereokiller.com/Boards/412558
https://forum.jamkazam.com/member.php?action=profile&uid=7714
https://acos.tym.sk/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=340
https://backloggery.com/susanwilson
http://sites.estvideo.net/alvasoft/forum/profile-15045.html
https://elclasificado.com/bakersfield/servicio/otros-servicios-generales/devops-consulting-services-17815046
https://pridenet.springfieldcollege.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/WSCB_899/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=06240753-8e82-4f72-956d-5df9d6eac5c8&p=2
https://www.sideprojectors.com/project/21354/devops-consulting-services
https://mycapitol.captechu.edu/ICS/Campus_Life/Campus_Groups/CapVets/Discussion.jnz?portlet=Forums&screen=PostView&screenType=change&id=b2f76aac-2539-4aa6-a445-784fcc1012ec&p=5
https://forums.outdoorsmagic.com/member.php/725666-susanwilson
http://www.renderedideas.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=53924&sid=5b174a70139a197e27fdfb2496f130f9
https://beautyreview.live/next-level-diy-makeup-hacks-for-you/#comment-62417
http://forum.ideesmaison.com/susanwilson-u172646.html
https://www.medstartr.com/profile/21594-susan-wilson
https://mycampus.lourdes.edu/web/63033/readers-nook/-/message_boards/message/2262023/maximized?doAsUserId=RkXRZ3lzVSc%3D%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F168761%2Fmaximized%2F-%2Fmessage_boards%2Fmessage%2F249940%2Fmaximized#_19_message_2262023
2020.12.01 06:07 dcrlatam FINAL REPORT of Decred Latam Marketing and Events Proposal 2 with detailed activities and financials from June to December 2020.
Final Activities Report Decred in Spanish Proposal 2 from June to December 2020
Highlights
Virtual Events:
Twitter:
submitted by dcrlatam to decred [link] [comments]
Highlights
- Double down on Dev power formation and headhunting with more content and two editions of the Decred Talent Land Blockchain Challenge
- Efforts and resources towards building Dev power in Spanish through the Decred Talent Land Blockchain Challenge and Dev related content.
- Organically grow Youtube audience through +50 pieces of new content related to Decred and cryptocurrencies in Spanish
- Working flows for content creation of #HablemosDecred, Código Decred, Decredizados, Podcast Decred in Spanish and the Decred Talent Land Blockchain Challenge.
- Broad network of professional contacts in Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, Spain, Uruguay and Venezuela.
- Content production: proved funnel from planning to execution on multiple media formats (audio, video, text and graphic design).
Virtual Events:
- June 25 HablemosDecred 6 "Git and Github: global collaboration tools" (twitter, twitter)
- June 25 "Crypto scams and community" with Bitcoin Embassy (tweet, tweet)
- July 2 "Fintech industry in Latam: global challengues" with Legal Hackers Medellin and BlockchainEx (tweet)
- July 3 "Governance in Blocks" with Anibal Garrido and Ezio Rojas from Cryptographic Fridays (tweet)
- July 22 "Code, communities, DAOs and blockchain" with Pablito and Camilolwi (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- July 22 "How to spot and prevent cryptoscams?" with elian and Matias Part from Crypto Resources Academy (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- July 23 "Who funds digital currencies?" by adacde in Blockchain Land (Youtube, Twitter announcement, Twitter, Blockchain Land)
- July 23 #HablemosDecred 7 "Cryptocurrenci scams and the community" by elian and Lorena Ortiz from Bitcoin Embassy Bar (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 5 "Governance and blockchain in Latin America" with Cristobal Pereira and Ernesto Contreras (Twitter announcement, Twitter announcement Blockchain Summit Latam)
- August 6 #HablemosDecred 8 "Commerce and cryptocurrencies" with Jose Manuel da Silva from criptolugares.com (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 20th #HablemosDecred 9 "Legal perspectives of cryptocurrencies" with Mauricio Ocampo from Technolawgeek (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- August 27th #HablemosDecred 10 Cybersecurity and cryptocurrencies with Carlos Martinez (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 28th Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies legal status in Latin America with Paxul (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 29 From Laws to Protocol with Students for Liberty and Adcade (Twitter announcement, Eventbrite, Facebook live)
- August 31st FAS panel on decentralized organisations with NEO and Dash (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- September 3th #HablemosDecred 11 Timestamps in Blockchain with Jose Zarate from Stamping.io (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- September 10th #HablemosDecred 12 "The importance of communities around protocols " with David Riascos cLabs (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- September 17th #HablemosDecred 13 "How to start a career in STEM and Blockchain" with Nancy Salazar from Platzi (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- September 24th #HablemosDecred 14 "The wild crypto maximalism" with Eloisa Cadenas from CryptoFintech (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- October 1st #HablemosDecred 15 "DeFi, NFTs and the future of investments" with Jose Rodriguez from TalentLand (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- October 2nd "Descentralized governance" panel with Crypto Resources Academy (Twitter announcement, Twitter, Meetup)
- October 8th #HablemosDecred 16 @Cryptocurrencies in Venezuela" with Ezio Rojas and Anibal Cripto (Twitter announcement, Youtube, Twitter)
- October 8th Criptolugares instagram live on Politeia (Twitter announcement)
- October 15th #HablemosDecred 17 “21 Heads crypto art show” with GusG, Jose Rodriguez and Aaron Koening (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- October 17th Introduction to Blockchain and Decred API (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- October 22 #HablemosDecred 18 “What is Decred” with Ana Chavez and Elian Huesca (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- October 29 #HablemosDecred 19 “Bitcoin in real life” with Ana Chavez and Manuel Flores from Bitcoin Monterrey (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- November 2th Blockchain Summit Latam keynote “Governance in public protocols) (Twitter announcement, Twitter)
- November 3th Decred Talent Land Blockchain Learning Challenge announcement (Twitter announcement)
- November 5th #HablemosDecred 20 “Cryptocurrencies, blockchain and journalism” with Fernando Quiros from Cointelegraph in Spanish (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- November 5th Panel on Talent Land Latam Online “Our Money, Our Rules: leaving behind the national currencies” with Ana Chavez, Pablo Labarta, Lorena Franco and Elian Huesca (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- June 12th Decredizados #02: The new Treasury (Youtube)
- June 23th Decredizados #03: A new way to vote (Youtube)
- July 2nd Politeia Express #01: (Youtube)
- July 7th Código Decred #01: Git & Github (Youtube)
- July 8th Introduction to Bitcoin, Decred and cryptocurrencies with Crypto Resources Academy (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- July 15th Instagram Live "What is Decred?" (Twitter announcement)
- July 27th Decredizados 5 (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 10th Código Decred #02: Exploring the Decred chain with Python (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 19th Politeia Express Marketing Proposals Overview in Spanish (Twitter announcement and video)
- August 31st Código Decred #03: Verifying Binaries (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- October 12th Introduction to DCR with Pablo Labarta (Youtube)
- November 8th “Lightning Network and more news” on Decredizados with Victor Rubin (Youtube)
- June 3 "Una forma más privada de hacer Staking en DCR" on (Medium)
- June 5th Decred Drive on (Medium)
- June 15th dcrtime thread on Twitter (tweet)
- June 17th Revista Decred on (Medium)
- June 17th Politeia Digest #32 in Spanish (Medium)
- June 20th Podcast "What is Decred?" with Territorio Bitcoin (ivoox)
- June 26th Decred wallet download thread (tweet)
- June 26th Decred Drive on (Medium)
- June 26th Decred Drive on (Medium)
- June 29th Decred Drive on (Medium)
- July 1st "How to set a Decred node" (Medium)
- July 1st "Porque Decred es necesario: un enfoque inclusivo sobre el dinero duradero" on (Medium)
- July 3th "El trabajo en el mundo digital: del Software libre a las Organizaciones Autónomas Descentralizadas" on (Medium)
- July 6th Decred Drive (2 de Julio) on (Medium)
- July 12th DCRDEX (Twitter)
- July 17th Decred Journal translation in Spanish (Twitter announcement, Medium)
- July 19th Politeia Digest 33 in Spanish (Twitter announcement, Medium)
- July 27th Decred pronunciation with Bugs Bunny (Twitter)
- July 31st "The Federal Reserve: a rigged game" translation by Franco (Twitter announcement, Medium)
- July 31st Golden Stakey (Twitter)
- August 3th Decred Devs repositories (Twitter)
- August 10th Codigo Decred "Exploring Decred with Python" with pablito (Twitter announcement, Youtube)
- August 11th Decred Journal July 2020 Spanish translation (Twitter announcement, Medium)
- August 13th Bug Bounty post (Twitter)
- August 21st How is money created post (Twitter)
- August 27th Politeia Digest #34 & #35 Spanish translation (Twitter announcement, Medium)
- August 31st Decred apreciation post and mention in Criptonoticias (Twitter)
- September 1st CryptoCheckout post (Twitter)
- September 8th review Trezor hardware wallet (Twitter)
- September 10th lecture recommendation "The federal reserve, A Blatantly Rigged Game" in Spanish (Twitter, Medium)
- September 11th Decred project dev community meme (Twitter)
- September 16th Golang meme (Twitter)
- September 23th Definition of sound money (Twitter)
- September 24th invitation to youtube channel (Twitter)
- September 24th invitation to github repo issues (Twitter)
- September 28th invitation to join Decred in Spanish devs telegram channel (Twitter)
- September 28th Politeia proposals update (Twitter)
- September 28th first episode of Decred in Spanish podcast (Twitter, Twitter)
- October 3th post on DCR security (Twitter)
- October 5th post on @steelbackup security (Twitter)
- October 7th Introduction to Blockchain and Decred API (Twitter)
- October 10th messaging proposals on Politeia (Twitter)
- October 15th Python web mining scholarship to participant in Introduction to Blockchain and Decred API (Twitter announcement)
- October 19th announcement 1000 followers on @Decred_ES twitter (Twitter)
- October 25th Decred in Spanish Podcast episode 2 (Twitter announcement, Spotify)
- October 25 Decred Journal September Spanish translation (Medium, [Twitter](https://twitter.com/
- October 26th Atomic Swaps thread (Twitter)
- October 26th DCRDEX installation thread and translation (Medium, Twitter)
- May 20th What is Decred? A secure, adaptable and sustainable store of value in Cointelegraph en Español
- June 9th Blockchain Land Director mention on Latam proposal approval (tweet)
- June 10th Decred Blockchain analysis from Richard Red translated to Spanish by Territorio Blockchain Magazine (tweet)
- June 18th Decred On-chain: Realised Cap, MVRV Ratio y Gradient Oscillators in Spanish by Territorio Blockchain Magazine (tweet)
- June 25th "BTC, ETH and DCR are part of the largest econmic and technological revolution of our generation" on Cointelegraph en Español
- July 3th Anibal Cripto on Governance panel with Ernesto Contreras from Dash Pay (tweet, tweet)
- July 17th "More than 20 new devs at Decred" by adcade for Cointelegraph in Spanish (Cointelegraph en Español)
- August 3th #HablemosDecred 8 mention by criptolugares (Twitter)
- August 7th Mention of Decred work in Latam by tomee in Cointelegraph en Español (Cointelegraph en Español)
- August 25th #HablemosDecred 9 Legal perspectives of cryptocurrency mention in Criptonoticias (Criptonoticias)
- August 26th Cryptocurrencies and the challengues of organic growth in Cointelegraph in Spanish (Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- September 21st coverage on #HablemosDecred 14 on The wild crypto maximalism (Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- September 28th coverage on #HablemosDecred 15 on DeFi, NFTs and investments of the future (Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- October 1st Criptolugares currency of the month (Twitter)
- October 5th covegare on #HablemosDecred 16 on Cryptocurrencies in Venezuela (Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- October 13th “21 Heads Crypto art Show: exploring the intersection of art and cryptocurrences”(Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- October 20th “What are the coming releases planned in Decred ecosystem?”(Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- October 28th “New edition of #HablemosDecred will explore the state of cryptocurrencies in Mexico”(Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- November 2nd “Next edition of #HablemosDecred will explore the intersection of cryptocurrencies and journalism”(Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- November 2nd “Blockchain Summit Latam 2020: exploring governance characteristics on public protocols” (Cointelegraph in Spanish)
- November 2nd and 3th Blockchain Summit Latam, Decred will be a Silver sponsor (Twitter)
Twitter:
- Followers: 1066 (+359, +50%)
- Engagement: 3.2
- Impressions: 237,000
- Link clicks: 763
- Retweets: 489
- Likes: 2400
- Comments: 149
- Followers: 477 (+144, +30%)
- Engagement: 60%
- Posts: 39
- Impressions: 741
- Likes: 711
- Comments: 28
- Followers: 763 (+94, +14%)
- Engagement:
- Likes: 719
- Posts: 126
- Impressions: 338,343 (+305,013, +1000%)
- Subscribers: 183 (+160, +680%)
- Engagement: 3.3% (+2.43, +300%)
- Videos: 55 (+40, +550%)
- Views: 2913 (+2629, +1000%)
- Impressions: 23600 (+21,251, +1000%)
- Members: 207 (+42, +20%)
- Members: 93 new members
- Total article views: 14,168
- Total article shares: 81
- As of this final report the Decred in Spanish activities have used 94% of the total proposal budget, or around $43,145 usd. This proposal expenditure was divided in 86% for contractors, content creation, design, virtual events, business development, social media management, user support and community organsing; and 14% for marketing expenses. For more information on the previous reports please visit the (Report 1, Report 2 and Report 3, [Report 4](), Report 5 and Report 6 to be updated on December 10th).
2019.11.05 15:34 CollectYourself Cum a facut Kazi Ploae versuri ca astea?
>e cuvantul simandicos citit cu coada ochiului pe fundul surioarei care azi joaca rolul de stewardeza zece mii de metri in aer savurand evolutia dintr-un pahar de plastic fluviu, capcane, ostatic ... de dragul tau dar nu pentru mult timp traiesc in coliba cu usi rabatabile si trepte rulante numita capitalism in zona zoster ma trezeam polonez din cauza nu stiu carui actor laconic bolnav imaginar nu stiu care act anost 1459 Vlad Tepes in exact acelasi loc in care acum ne dam tepe scrisTZ de la esti un om bolnav iesi afara din casa du-te la tarfe si spune saru' mana apoi du-te spre prova, popa, tribord si babord intr-un cimitir nipon cu dinti de dragon in loc decruce in mod sigur o sa te ajute claxoane cardiopate am predat geometria regretului acum iti dau meditatii reminiscente tragice intr-un crescendo fatidic totodata simpatic campionule cu pasii tai minuscului iesi din pestera pana si tara are forma de peste e momentul sa iti pierzi controlul in caz ca cineva te hraneste saracia anuleaza sinucideri de mare efect gandurile scuza gandirea cuvintele sunt fulgi de zapada / romania a murit cand fetita femeii de servici s-a hotarat sa se prefaca romania a murit cand al 10-lea domn distins a scuipat sonor un perete nevinovat de piatra radeti de mine pentru ca sunt diferit io rad de voi pentru ca sunteti toti la fel
> servesc grenade ca un tic puternic prins in viscol cu o revista in care ma privesc cu un taco in sud de bristol flow-ul meu bionic vine spiralat de lipsuri ca intr-un clic bizar cu jules renard ,elena si pericle abund in aripi ca un fuselaj ierarhic intre un heruvim flamand si un boeing 747 ating climaxul ca un cersetor in taxi in drum spre casa de cartoane savurand viata la maxim am bani de dat in urmatorii zece ani pentru ca toti vecinii mei aveau geamuri de termopan stau foarte prost cu nervii nu-ti forta norocul s-ar putea sa te trezesti rulat intr-un covor in flacari putin bolnav dar o sa iti treaca intro joi pentru ca joi e curat lung si slab ca o lacrïma
link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANqV801EuSk
Care este opinia voastra?Cum reusesti sa scrii versuri cu atat de multe metafore?
Care ar purea fi sursele de inspiratie?
submitted by CollectYourself to Romania [link] [comments]
> servesc grenade ca un tic puternic prins in viscol cu o revista in care ma privesc cu un taco in sud de bristol flow-ul meu bionic vine spiralat de lipsuri ca intr-un clic bizar cu jules renard ,elena si pericle abund in aripi ca un fuselaj ierarhic intre un heruvim flamand si un boeing 747 ating climaxul ca un cersetor in taxi in drum spre casa de cartoane savurand viata la maxim am bani de dat in urmatorii zece ani pentru ca toti vecinii mei aveau geamuri de termopan stau foarte prost cu nervii nu-ti forta norocul s-ar putea sa te trezesti rulat intr-un covor in flacari putin bolnav dar o sa iti treaca intro joi pentru ca joi e curat lung si slab ca o lacrïma
link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANqV801EuSk
Care este opinia voastra?Cum reusesti sa scrii versuri cu atat de multe metafore?
Care ar purea fi sursele de inspiratie?
2010.09.19 03:06 eltimdrake Revista MAXIM Edicion Agosto 2010 U.S.A. “DANIA RAMIREZ” of ENTOURAGE
submitted by eltimdrake to reddit.com [link] [comments]
2009.05.04 05:02 blogven Scans de la Revista Maxim (mayo/2009), con Yulia Snigir. BlogVen.Net
submitted by blogven to es [link] [comments]