 |
| Is 3I/ATLAS Nonhuman Intelligence? |
Now, the below essentially combines AI model collapse, information theory (training data entropy), astrosociology (the "Zoo hypothesis"), and xenophilosophy, in thinking about reasons for the Great Silence of the Fermi paradox. It came to me in a flash while driving home, so it is quite undeveloped.
Sadly, the other YouTube comments were nearly all spam, religious zealotry, uninformed nonsense, or platitudes. I was hoping the video's creator would actually read - or maybe even respond to - my comment - although it appears that is very unlikely. I'd love nothing more than to dialogue with someone about my thesis here; so if you think it is interesting please contact me so we can discuss it. It's something I believe could turn out to be a good publishable paper or of interest to USG.]
"The Model Collapse Hypothesis: Solving the Fermi Paradox Through AI Information Theory"
I believe that wondering what is “beyond” AI can actually provide a potential answer to the Fermi Paradox. Intelligences with absolute control over their own development, especially if that intelligence is a starfaring civilization, would likely run into the same problem that AI suffers when it becomes “frail” (a loss of robustness) which is caused by utilizing the same training data over and over. This is a form of model collapse.
A civilization with total technological control over its own intelligence would likely possess the technology to travel from star to star, realizing that remaining homebound on one planet long-term risks civilizational extinction whether from natural disaster, hostile others of some kind, or the inevitable death of its home sun. Yet, a civilization in nomadic space travel for long periods of time would only ever have its own "training data" to use in the constructive advance and development of its intelligence. It would eventually hit a ceiling where all incoming data is only ever a reflection of itself. This means, in turn, that a sort of "data inbreeding" would occur where the informational novelty needed for the spontaneity and surprise of natural evolution would slowly diminish and disappear. (Programmed random surprise isn’t really surprise.)
It's reasonable to assume that such a civilization would realize that the continued advance of its intelligence requires authentic “otherness” – true “ontological difference” and novelty that comes from outward and beyond. They would need to seek out "the Other" in order to be taught something new, feeding the system with fresh training data to keep it robust and acquiring new information.
However, if you are continually searching out novelty in the form of otherness, i.e. civilizations with knowledge and technology different from your own, you would probably realize that such a search comes with a certain degree of existential risk. Not every civilization would be friendly. But those civilizations who are technologically less capable could be perfect sources of the novelty required for your civilization’s intelligence to advance and further develop itself into something new, more encompassing, and more complex. The reason we don't see others is that any civilization in this scenario would likely interact with us only from a distance, or without us knowing it. They would likely practice a form of strategic non-interference, fearing that knowledge of their presence would “taint” the novel datta we have to offer. If the scenario I described above was occuring, I certainly think that that advanced intelligence would stay hidden to protect the purity of the data.
