Do we need to die for this to happen? inshallah

    • InevitableSwing [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I googled.

      Astrobiologist lays out scenario for intelligent life on water worlds

      Under the right conditions, could such water-dwelling creatures [as octopus] develop technology on an alien water world? That may be more challenging than it was for our forebears, Schulze-Makuch says.

      “Fire can’t exist underwater, and fire is thought to have been essential for humans to develop technology,” Schulze-Makuch notes. However, there’s one potential avenue that he and co-author William Bains explore in their book, “The Cosmic Zoo: Complex Life on Many Worlds.”

      “Perhaps smart ocean creatures could use thermal vents on an alien planet’s seafloor to supply concentrated heat energy,” Schulze-Makuch says. “Such energy wouldn’t be as portable or controllable as fire, but the underwater civilization could farm fish without fire, or perhaps use other resources to make tools and technology. As an example, long strands of kelp could be ideal for making rope.”

  • Riffraffintheroom [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Anyone read the Children if Time trilogy? I don’t wanna ruin too much but there’s civilization of octopuses that communicate through a combination of strobing skin patterns and interpretative dance and every single one of them is an artist. It’s great.

  • genderbitch [she/her, it/its]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    11 hours ago

    It’s real sad to me how all the other intelligent lifeforms on this planet are biologically limited in one way or another. Rats? Live a few years. Octopi? Live a few years. Dolphins? The fuck they gonna do with those flippers? Ravens? Ditto, but wings. They can’t even masturbate. Humans hit the evolutionary jackpot.

    • Enjoyer_of_Games [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Humans didn’t evolve and then start using tools, our ancestors used crude tools, much like many of he species you listed occasionally do, which resulted in an evolutionary selection bias for those who could best make use of tools. Tool use created humans and it in time could create descendants of those other species who are much more capable of using tools.

      • genderbitch [she/her, it/its]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yeah, that is true. Still, primates at least had a pretty good base from which to work towards evolving to use tools - hands, relatively high intelligence, and decent lifespans. I don’t even know how you’d go about giving a dolphin or ravens grippers. Octopi and rats have a decent base to work with in terms of grabbing things, but they would need to evolve to extend their lifetimes several times over before they could reasonably maintain a civilization.

        Tbh as someone else said, it’s most likely some other primate species would take over in the meantime since they’re much closer.

    • foxontherocks [undecided, undecided]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 hours ago

      I think the raven’s bigger problem is that they are just too weak. Humans aren’t very strong by animal standards but we are strong enough to break wood and rocks. How would a raven ever get past the stone age. You’d need an entire flock of ravens with stone axes to fell a tree.

    • kittin [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Whenever I read an article like this or about the probability of extraterrestrial civilization, I think there is the enormously hubristic assumption that “technological civilization” is, from an evolutionary perspective, a long-term success strategy.

      Like, behaviorally modern humans are maybe 100,000 years old, the epoch in humans actually do enough stuff in the world to be force relevant to climate and biodiversity is maybe 5-10,000 years.

      Maybe the answer to the Fermi paradox is obvious and maybe being a shark who swims and eat fish is an evolutionarily superior pattern, technologically civilized societies are evidentially doomed by the observation made in the Fermi paradox.

      • Thorngraff_Ironbeard [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Yeah if we accept that at the very base the only criteria for success in a living organism is propagation then bacteria are by far the most successful. I personally agree and think sapient life is an aberration.

      • genderbitch [she/her, it/its]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 hours ago

        True, no opposable thumbs, though. Perhaps they could develop some kind of written language, but I don’t think it’d be nearly as easy as it is for us and I doubt they’d be able to do much with complex tools.

    • Carcharodonna [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      There are sharks they’ve found that are 400 years old. I’m telling you, when sharks get larger brains and opposable thumbs, humans are done for. transshork-happy

  • Daemon Silverstein
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 hours ago

    So, H. P. Lovecraft was always right: Cthulhu will rule through human demising.

  • HarryLime [any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Then why aren’t they doing it now? Oh, do you need humans to die out first? Lame excuse. More like Fraudcopuses!