Generation Ships

[gjc8]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

I don't understand the question. Human "ghosts" are AIs.

I was responding mostly to people like Flyndaren who were claiming that programming "AIs" to raise children was going to be a challenge. From that context, I inferred that we were talking about de novo AIs.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Assuming that's possible en masse without a vast supporting infra-structure of social and technological margin. History shows very little support for the premise, and quite a bit of reason to think it won't work under the conditions innate to a genship.

History showed no support for the United States of America being able to survive for more than a decade or two as a continent spanning republic, let alone as a republic that grew MORE democratic. Mass participation of women in politics is without historical support. Before the 1800's no large scale society on Earth eliminated Slavery.

The past is an important source of evidence, but it doesn't limit either the future or the present.

New England is two centuries further removed from the frontier than Texas. That's a key factor in the differences. The local geographical and climatic conditions are important variables, too. The founding stock (especially genetic) is important, but predicting how it will interact with the environment it operates in over generations is impossible. The results are usually obvious and clear...in retrospect. Beforehand the results are almost never accurately predicted.

Evidence of various kinds (historical, archeological, literary) shows that late 17th century New England, in spite of King Phillip's war, had a lower rate of violence than late 19th century Texas. The culture of New England always restrained and disapproved of violence. The Texans always glorified violence. Culture counts.

A genship will be non-mass-violent for the simple reason that violence=death. It's unlikely a genship could survive a civil war aboard, so those genships that survive will be those who don't have one.

OTOH, dueling and culturally-constrained single combat, even to the death, might be a viable possibility.

We've done without dueling for well over a century. They could find other ways to fight on a starship.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

He's asking because Margaret Mead's work on the sexual permissiveness of early 20th century Samoa has been debunked as being chielfy informed by the sexual boasting two individuals. Other reports of Pacific Islander promiscuity in earlier periods include what was more like prostitution than free love between social peers.

Much of this is tied up in controversies. One of the main sources of this controversy is the simple fact that many modern Pacific Islanders are devout Christians and are offended by outsiders knowing about their ancestors freewheeling ways.

It's much like this Iranian woman I met once. I was told she was a literary scholar. I asked her what she thought were the best Pre-Islamic Iranian literary works and were could I get good translations. She told me Iran had no Pre-Islamic literature of any kind. It was a source of shame for her and many of her co-religionists (in her type of Islam) to admit that there was any link between modern and Pre-Islamic culture. Many societies in the modern world find anthropological studies of their recent ancestors deeply embarassing. Especially the acurate studies!

The Pacific Islanders, and those who hold that humanity needs to submit to tight generally patriarchal sexual rules, want to erase or edit the history of these islands.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by Sindri

If you consider another poster's assertion bogus you could
1 Mention you disagree
2 Provide citations
3 Ask the poster why they made the assertion
4 Dispute their points
5 Ignore them

None of these involve asking people where support for their assertions may be found which is a request for a citation in disguise.

"Where is this supported?" is an idiom that a reasonable person can take to mean at least 1 and 3, the same way a reasonable person can understand that, "What are you doing?" needn't literally be a request to name an activity.

Originally Posted by Sindri

If a generation ship is encountering unexpected real problems (as opposed to minor necessary adjustments) after the ship is underway then it is in real trouble.

I think I see our fundamental mismatch of expectations. You seem to see the TL8 genship undertaking as something essentially perfectible on the first try with sufficient preparation, while I see it as an attempt to build a mobile TL8 civilization in a bottle, having such nigh-unaddressable complexity that even if the entire resources of the earth were exhausted in nothing but preparing and making TL8 genships, we could not expect to discover and solve beforehand all the sorts of problems likely to crop up on the next ship.

This is why I suggested waiting until it is demonstrated that similarly enclosed habitats can be maintained aloft in the atmosphere of the earth. If it can't be set up to work here with the resources of the world available, chucking them into space is a non-starter.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

"Where is this supported?" is an idiom that a reasonable person can take to mean at least 1 and 3, the same way a reasonable person can understand that, "What are you doing?" needn't literally be a request to name an activity.

I have never encountered someone asking where something is supported when in fact they meant why it was supported, how it was supported, or by what it was supported before. For that matter I haven't encountered people asking what are you doing without expecting at least some vague abstract activity being named. Of course it is in the nature of idioms to confuse people. For me asking where something is implicitly involves a location and thus cannot be answered without giving a location. I apologize for misinterpreting your posts.

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

I think I see our fundamental mismatch of expectations. You seem to see the TL8 genship undertaking as something essentially perfectible on the first try with sufficient preparation, while I see it as an attempt to build a mobile TL8 civilization in a bottle, having such nigh-unaddressable complexity that even if the entire resources of the earth were exhausted in nothing but preparing and making TL8 genships, we could not expect to discover and solve beforehand all the sorts of problems likely to crop up on the next ship.

This is why I suggested waiting until it is demonstrated that similarly enclosed habitats can be maintained aloft in the atmosphere of the earth. If it can't be set up to work here with the resources of the world available, chucking them into space is a non-starter.

I think you have discovered the mismatch yes. What about strictly technical problems not including social or other issues? You build one generation ship and crew it until the society breaks down then repair it and fix the technical issues and try again &c. Would you think it reasonable to get rid of all technical issues over time?

Well yeah I assumed that before the generation ship set out there were a series of tests of increasing closeness to the conditions of the generation ship. First you build some kind of closed ecosystem capable of maintaining the oxygen level for human life then you build one capable of totally supporting humans then you enclose some humans in it for a decent period of time then you make one in space and enclose humans in it for a decent period of time. (Just an example progression and missing all kinds of steps.)

Like I pointed out above though this isn't supposed to be a thread rigidly about TL 8 generation ships but generation ships in general with an emphasis on lower TLs.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Lamech

The standard GURPS assumptions seem to imply it. They have no disadvantages or traits that would limit their ability to do so, other than possibly not looking like a human. That said, you also might consider changing those assumptions to make some things more interesting to your setting. For example if you don't want an AI to stop an evil mayor like I posted earlier...

It's a bit tricky (not impossible, but tricky) to create a believable scenario for a genship if AI isn't operating under certain limitations. (Sort of like trying to set up a scenario for a global trade system based on sailing ships, when cheap diesel tech and diesel fuel are also available.)

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Sindri

Again? Really?

I see no reason to assume careful parenting and carefree sexual pastimes would require unusually large amounts of support. From my point of view while the particular attitudes to parenting and sex don't have a direct historical basis the general history of such things leads me to conclude that it would work.

I'm not sure what that means, exactly. There isn't a general history of such things. Most actual attempts to implement anything like that on even a small scale have ended badly. There have been many attempts on a small scale, there seems to be a cyclical tendency to them (mostly recently in the 1960s and 1970s), but it's yet to work very well.

That doesn't prove it can't be done, but it does suggest that it's not a very likely possibility, based on what data we have.

Depending on how the life support works a prison could be as simple as locking the imprisoned with enough to support him and letting him support himself if he wants to live. The ship wouldn't really lose anything unless something else is wrong.

That might work, depending on the genship culture, and if they had enough margin. OTOH, it probably wouldn't have a great deal of deterrent power, and it leaves open the possibility that someone might let him out.

It would be a more viable option for a lone trouble-maker than for someone with some organized support.

Yes the ship will react harshly to anyone endangering it's hydraulics.

Yeah, but that's the easy part, in a way. A more difficult question for the planners and decision-makers aboard is what constitues a threat to the mission, even if it doesn't direclty affect the machinery. For ex, how much free expression can be tolerated? What subjects are verboten even for discussion, if any? What is compulsory and what is forbidden?

That's where it gets tricky, and the decisions are necessary. The outcome is not pre-set but the decisions have to be made.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Sindri

He's asking because "asking" for supporting evidence is what he has been doing throughout the thread.

No, as a matter of fact I have not done that, other than this one time. You have me confused with someone else. Unless you mean my point that we need to look for real-world examples of parallel situations. If we're not going to do that, then anything we do is pure speculation, with no grounding at all.

Originally Posted by Astromancer

The historical and anthropological records.

Well, no, they don't support the idea that Polynesia was a free and open sexually permissive society (or rather set of societies). There was quite a bit of sex, but it was heavily culturally regulated. It just wasn't regulated in the same way as in the West. The 'free and easy' part is largely a myth, like the 'peaceful, non-violent Maya' or the 'ecologically sensitive Amerind'.

As an activity, popular anthropology has been notorious for sometimes letting wishful thinking cloud assessments.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Sindri

I have never encountered someone asking where something is supported when in fact they meant why it was supported, how it was supported, or by what it was supported before. For that matter I haven't encountered people asking what are you doing without expecting at least some vague abstract activity being named. Of course it is in the nature of idioms to confuse people. For me asking where something is implicitly involves a location and thus cannot be answered without giving a location. I apologize for misinterpreting your posts.



I think you have discovered the mismatch yes. What about strictly technical problems not including social or other issues? You build one generation ship and crew it until the society breaks down then repair it and fix the technical issues and try again &c. Would you think it reasonable to get rid of all technical issues over time?

Well yeah I assumed that before the generation ship set out there were a series of tests of increasing closeness to the conditions of the generation ship. First you build some kind of closed ecosystem capable of maintaining the oxygen level for human life then you build one capable of totally supporting humans then you enclose some humans in it for a decent period of time then you make one in space and enclose humans in it for a decent period of time. (Just an example progression and missing all kinds of steps.)

Probably, the best way to prepare a genship (assuming time existed to do it) would be to build it in the Solar System, and let it work for a generation or three, at least, along the lines of an O'Neil Habitat, before actually setting out for the stars.

Conversely, the population of such a habitat, if it had been in operation for a few generations, would be a good starting group for the crew of a genship.

[Sindri]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

I'm not sure what that means, exactly. There isn't a general history of such things. Most actual attempts to implement anything like that on even a small scale have ended badly. There have been many attempts on a small scale, there seems to be a cyclical tendency to them (mostly recently in the 1960s and 1970s), but it's yet to work very well.

That doesn't prove it can't be done, but it does suggest that it's not a very likely possibility, based on what data we have.

The general history of sex and parenting as interpreted by Sindri not the general history of carefree sex and careful parenting. My limited knowledge of such subjects makes me believe that there isn't anything intrinsic in "human nature" that keeps it from working and that if it worked it wouldn't require unusually large amounts of support.

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

That might work, depending on the genship culture, and if they had enough margin. OTOH, it probably wouldn't have a great deal of deterrent power, and it leaves open the possibility that someone might let him out.

It would be a more viable option for a lone trouble-maker than for someone with some organized support.

If you can isolate them with the life support necessary to support themselves it doesn't cost any margin. That's the whole point. Assuming the ship wasn't under unusual pressure before the ship could support it's population and keep whatever margin it has before. Isolate one person and one persons worth of life support and the rest of the ship is in the same situation they were in before. That said it does have some significant disadvantages and won't work in all cultures.

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Yeah, but that's the easy part, in a way. A more difficult question for the planners and decision-makers aboard is what constitues a threat to the mission, even if it doesn't direclty affect the machinery. For ex, how much free expression can be tolerated? What subjects are verboten even for discussion, if any? What is compulsory and what is forbidden?

That's where it gets tricky, and the decisions are necessary. The outcome is not pre-set but the decisions have to be made.

Yep that's a lot harder. Of course under some situations the planners and decision makers might have difficulty keeping the community from lynching someone they think is a threat to the ship.

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Probably, the best way to prepare a genship (assuming time existed to do it) would be to build it in the Solar System, and let it work for a generation or three, at least, along the lines of an O'Neil Habitat, before actually setting out for the stars.

Conversely, the population of such a habitat, if it had been in operation for a few generations, would be a good starting group for the crew of a genship.

Yeah that's a really critical step before you actually send it off.