[gibrown]

Interesting use of inference. Kinda feels like it ignores many of the discussions (or my limited understanding of them) around the Fermi paradox http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html

In summary: "We’re rare, we’re first, or we’re fucked."

The article seems to assume that there are lots of populations just because there are lots of planets. But the time that those planets have been around matters too.

[kirykl]

That's only if there's a great filter though

[JumpCrisscross]

There's no accepted resolution to both Sagan's posited frequency of life and Fermi's paradox other than filters.

[hodwik2]

I would argue that this article posits a new, compelling filter.

If most species are large, and from small planets, they will have much stricter resource constraints than we did.

As a result, they are unlikely to have industrialized the way we did, as it would have depleted their resources too quickly. As a result, they are unlikely to be a silicon-age species.

Drawing from the author's biological/size argument, they're likely to have longer lifespans than we do, and considerably fewer births.

Given their resource constraints, and longer lifespans, they are likely to have strong communal systems of resource allocation, and are unlikely to have moved towards Capitalism.

Given their longer lifespans, they are probably more risk averse than our own species -- as willingness for an animal to die is strongly related to size and lifespan. This suggests they may be less war-faring than ourselves, and thus less likely to have nations.

Given their closer relationship with nature, due to their resource constraints, they're likely to have developed a Pagan system of thought, rather than a monotheistic theology.

As a result, they are unlikely to be motivated towards large infrastructural, imperial or technological projects as a result of: profit motive, national motive, or religious motive.

I'd argue then, that it is unlikely they have produced a civilization of significance.

--

Long story short; local alien species are likely to be tribal, communist, non-technological, and environmentalist.

If through some strange force a species of this kind managed to become technologically advanced, they would likely look down on a species such as our own as a sort of vermin, because of our numbers, hunger and short lives.

[kirykl]

interesting view that bypasses a great filter. Advanced without technology. Highlights that technology really might be an anti-pattern.

But Carl Sagan would probably refute that - "It is perfectly possible to imagine civilizations of poets or (perhaps) Bronze Age warriors who never stumble on James Clerk Maxwell’s equations and radio receivers. But they are removed by natural selection. The Earth is surrounded by a population of asteroids and comets, such that occasionally the planet is struck by one large enough to do substantial damage." http://gencodesignal.info/the-abundance-of-life-bearing-plan...

[hodwik]

To be clear, I'm not arguing they'd become advanced. I'm arguing they'd never become advanced.

I think the Drake Equation solution that Sagan proposes puts values that are orders of magnitude too large for most variables. In this case fi (where he confuses intelligent life with civilization) and fc.