[Grishnakh]

You're making a lot of assumptions. You're assuming that it's that easy to make a self-replicating probe that's that intelligent, for one. Any civilization that advanced may have put a lot of thought into what such probes should do, and how they should interact with other civilizations. They may very well have come up with the Prime Directive and only observed, without becoming detected by primitive cultures such as ours.

You're assuming that there aren't other spacefaring civilizations out there who are opposed to these probes, and that don't actively seek them out and destroy them.

You're assuming that the galaxy and nearby vicinity is old enough for one of these civilizations to become this advanced and to build these probes and for one of them to reach us. Who knows, maybe there just aren't that many really old civilizations around yet. Just look at how long it took us to evolve to this point.

[pklausler]

My original point stands. We haven't observed vN-B probes. This negative result is useful in a Bayesian way; it makes it less likely that the galaxy is full of tech civilizations, and makes other possibilities more likely, including several that you mentioned in a needlessly belligerent fashion.

[fergussimpson]

Ah, but take a look at this chart:

https://xkcd.com/1633/

For anything more than 10^6 km away and less than 10 metres in size, we just wouldn't see it. We have only just noticed some enormous lumps on Ceres, and it seems a whole planet has evaded detection until now.

I don't think it's particularly likely we will find a vN probe. But to consider their non-detection to be of statistical significance is, I think, an overestimation of our technological capabilities.

[pklausler]

vN-B probes are not passive objects. They would have observable effects from mining and propulsion, at least.