The great filter | Robin Hanson | TEDxLimassol

This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. "The earth is flat”. “Home computers are useless”. “Humanity is condemned to be starved”. “Women are born inferior”. Throughout the years, pioneering scientific discoveries overturn established theories, vibrant societies transcend dominant perceptions, bold individuals expand physical and intellectual limits proving everything wrong: This is the way in which we seek to improve our lives and to deepen the understanding of the world around us. At TEDxLimassol we are searching for the next refute in small and large things: In the universe and subatomic particles. In our societies and in our bodies. In our behavior, attitudes and perceptions. In our mental, physical and personal capabilities. Proving everything wrong is always the right thing to do.
*Where there is doubt, there is freedom.
Robin Hanson is an associate professor of economics at George Mason University, a research associate at the Future of Humanity Institute of Oxford University, and chief scientist at Consensus Point. After receiving his Ph.D. in social science from the California Institute of Technology in 1997, Robin was a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation health policy scholar at the University of California at Berkeley. In 1984, Robin received a masters in physics and a masters in the philosophy of science from the University of Chicago, and afterward spent nine years researching artificial intelligence, Bayesian statistics, and hypertext publishing at Lockheed, NASA, and independently.
Robin has over 70 publications, and has pioneered prediction markets since 1988, being a principal architect of the first internal corporate markets, at Xanadu in 1990, of the first web markets, the Foresight Exchange since 1994, of DARPA’s Policy Analysis Market, from 2001 to 2003, and of Daggre/Scicast, since 2010.
About TEDx, x = independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)

[@TheOicyu812]

"Something out there is killing everything, . . . . . and you're likely next." (hold for awkward applause).

[@Southflbud]

Such a marvelously uplifting and positive lecture... He's quite the optimist!

[@floppavevo5920]

I know right

[@SpartanWolf120]

I was just goin to make that comment 😂

[@rasiabsgamingcorner2258]

I mean he does raise a good point though. The shear odds that we should've seen life out there and we havent is and should be concerning

[@dannywhite9975]

I've been listening thousands of talk engaging, informative, insightful talk ... Fortunately anything so hopeless n' deprexing like this 1 be4 X-D

[@RedmotionGames]

Optimism is just the polite word for delusional.

[@paulgrote7139]

He’s the great filter. He can’t hide it. The laugh, the perfect understanding, the tie

[@Boogieplex]

I like that he’s not sugar coating our odds. And he’s totally correct.Given what we observe, we are on borrowed time. But there’s a small chance we can get it right. Lets hope we are up to the task, but we may not have a choice.

[@theexchipmunk]

There is a possibility that we simply are early.

[@joeburgess2464]

The universe is 14 billion years old. The universe will be around for at least 100 trillion years after we're dead. This is the most likely scenario (I should think).

[@raygunn95]

He acknowledges this in the last two minutes, he's just morbid about it lol

[@TheJMBon]

Exactly. Life requires rocky planets with heavy elements and molecules. None of those can exist until several generations of stars have lived theur entires lives and died. I'd say it took the universe 10B years just to get to the point where life could even start forming. It's taken Earth almost 4B more just for humanity to arrive. Id say we are extremely early abd assuming we can spread beyond our solar system, humanity will be known as a 'pre-cursor civilization' or an 'ancient civilization'.

[@theexchipmunk]

@@TheJMBon It’s not even just that. The heavy elements would have started to come a few million years after the first stars formed. Not as plentiful as later with neutron star collisions, but there would already be enough for that. Much more problematic is the gargantuan super and hyper nova and quasars iradiating whole local groups to the degree they would sterilise everything. It’s only really in the last about 5 billion years everything calmed down enough for life as we know it to start.

[@TheRewindRoom]

Who is here after watching Kurzgesagt's Great Filter ?

[@vbmudalige]

Me

[@ausernameiguess7058]

me! it was recommended next

[@oknar1977]

Yep, and it started great, ended disappointingly boring. This guy is into third minute and very interesting

[@marty6901]

Its so sad that this only has 2 thousand views, when this could be the most important topic of our existence. Humans priorities are much too skewed to make it past the next filter, so i guess all we can do is enjoy life while we have it...

[@meangreen8873]

+Chris Martsolf This is only a theory, and a shit one at that. Look up the zoo hypothesis, much more logical in terms of outside life. Taking this filter bullshit seriously is pure ignorance.

[@HaloForgeUltra]

+Kyle Greenough This is not a theory, until we find life on mars or europa, it is a hypothesis. Not really enough evidence from a single galaxy. Also, who says that giant structures that are visible are even possible or necessary. What about KIC 8462852, that could be an observation of something. Possibly.

[@wasdwasdedsf]

or do whatever we can to maximise the chance of creating a civilization with unimagineably many creatures living lives of incredible quality. the slighest, tiniest increase in the odds of making that happen has tremendous expected value, virtually infinitely far better than any philantropic cause that has no effect on the likelihood of this.

[@wasdwasdedsf]

no, this is probabillity

[@katiekat4457]

Chris Martsolf Why the hum-glum sad attitude? You're going to be long gone anyways.

[@stellastarfield1111]

"Maybe a pandemic..."

[@PotyguaraBardo]

😬😬

[@t3mporal3lbow]

I need to watch this 20 more times...RH is brilliant, but his judgement of what is within the audiences easy reach seems optimistic.

[@TheRewindRoom]

Wow dude good comment!

[@Oman-mv2mx]

Love it! Why isn't this the standard view. The great filter is out biology! It's all well to talk about warp drives, anti-matter drives and kugelblitz engines but our biology can't leave this planet. We've spent 4 billion years evolving to this planets ecosystem. We can barely survive 6 months in space with out loosing vision. Forget about giving birth in space, surviving gamma ray bursts. We are lucky to live in a calm part of the universe with jupiter protecting us, large moon stabilizing the seasons etc. If space travel is possible it won't be by us, we will have to speciate ourselves by which point we might accept to enjoy the paradise which is earth.

[@prusak26]

it was once believed that the speed of above 30 kph would kill a human being.

[@darkwingduck47]

"We've spent 4 billion years evolving to this planets ecosystem. We can barely survive 6 months in space with out loosing vision. Forget about giving birth in space, surviving gamma ray bursts." it all comes down to technology and how we use it) we can protect ourselves against gamma rays, even today we can grow an animal without a mother organism, and I don't see a reason why we can't simulate gravity in future, etc.

[@Chris.Davies]

You are entirely correct. Biological Humans can never survive in space for any length of time. Not in any location. And so it is Virtual Humans who will leave biological Humans behind when they expand into the galaxy.

[@maximuscomfort]

This is about the truest video about the universe and makes sense to me. Thank you for this informative video.

[@tolikin4ca]

Bravo, Robin Hanson. It left to make one last effort to answer the question about the essence of this filter.

[@arlinegeorge6967]

Informative talk. Thank you, bless you. All your dreams come true.

[@NaveenKumar-yq8gp]

Since we are seeing in past, the life on other planet may be not observed now .But they might be observed in future.

[@johnnydoe2672]

You’re right. We probably don’t even have the senses to detect certain forms of light, since the laws of nature vary drastically from galaxy to galaxy

[@oknar1977]

If there are aliens out there - their ways of travelling and communicating would be observable within 10 years span with the our 20th century technology by now.

[@trueLuminus]

16:27 "Something out there is killing everything." Yes. It's called a Gamma Ray Burst. Read (seriously, do it now) "An Astrophysical Explanation for the Great Silence," by James Annis. Link address below (spaces added to avoid html): arxiv .org/ abs/ astro-ph/ 9901322

[@russellhamer8347]

So uplifting!

[@superfriends8336]

5 years since this was posted.. watching it in 2020 hit kind of different when he said a possible future filter to kill us all is a pandemic 💀💀💀💀

[@oknar1977]

yeah,, perhaps pandemic is caused by aliens/God/universe to filter humans out?

[@paaao]

I think the large point he failed to touch on is that the universe is large. It's enormous. We can barely see or understand what is happening just a few million light years away. It's very likely that many forms of life exist within this universe, and other universes, that cannot possibly ever come into contact with one another at all, ever, no matter how advanced they become. There are very likely, physical barriers to light even traveling from one end to the other when you consider the fact that the universe is always expanding, faster and faster, many times faster than the speed of light. Huge fact that he is neglecting in his analysis.

[@Honkler270]

Sad thing is we will never leave our local group of galaxies.

[@tomasr.2945]

Assume for a moment that we developed a way to travel at the speed of light. While it may be "fast" in Earth terms, it's really, really slow for interstellar travel. It takes 8 minutes to get to the sun, 4 years to get to the nearest star. 424 years to Pleiades. 7000 years to visit the pillars of creation. 28000 years to get to the center of the Milky Way, our galaxy. Einstein's model of the universe prevents anything with mass to travel at the speed of light, and even then, it takes millennia to cover any significant distance.

[@MatheusC1729]

It's very likely that interestelar flights would be done through by frozen astronauts or even robots. Or, at the least, by civilizations who are scaping from disasters, like the Wall-E movie. They could just be at the ship from thousands of years, if it is necessary to their survival.

[@oknar1977]

"Large point he failed to touch on is that the universe is large." You are very close but you missed the point. It is not about the size - it is about the dimension and dimensions. Flatland - 2D meets 3D. It just means - there could be parallel universes, multiple universes - other worlds - with their own set of physical laws. If we know that double slit experiment means that matter changes once it is observed - this means we are in a simulation. There is some other dimension out there and we are in laboratory - and our task is to finish the tasks, work on our deficiencies and learn about life and people around us - to become better in everything. We are in a school.

[@paaao]

@@oknar1977 for one, we don't know that matter changes when observed. We know that to observe matter, light is required for our eyes, and we in turn invent instruments that run using the same principles. All matter is essentially stable light. It's incredibly high frequency RF that has iterated with other high frequency RF to form essentially a standing wave, that we label "matter". The double slit experiments do not show anything other than destructive and constructive interference between these many frequencies of RF, and there are many competing scientific theories (pilot wave, threshold, etc...) that still work just fine, mathematically, without the need to divide peaks and troughs into particles, and other atomistic mathematical concepts that are not truly reality. Photons, bosons, quarks, and [fill in the blank] are just quantified pieces of a fluid soup of electromagnetic fields all merging, expanding, contracting, to create the world of forms we all know and love. Anyways, a simulation is very likely not true. Nature doesn't do math. Nature is not divided up into this that and the other. It's all one connected blob of interconnected waves of varying EMF. It's humans that pick the waves apart and assign values to them, draw distinctions, and map out the rules. Nature simply follows the path of least resistance, and runs on pressure mediation. To believe in simulation, is to reject free will, and once you roam down that philosophical path, you run into so many contradictions that it becomes a fool's errand right out the gate.

[@FreakyLynx]

I enjoy discussions like these but I don’t take them too seriously. People can have a tendency to get too caught up in the math and forget we really don’t know and don’t have enough facts to draw reliable conclusions or even theories. They’re all shots in the dark. So don’t let discussions like this get you down, they really don’t have any answers. I do however appreciate referencing Saberhagen’s Berserkers ;)

[@thecurious48]

The last filter towards advancement: Keeping Up With The Kardashians

[@Ryan-the-Rocketeer]

i watched this right after watching Tiger King and well i don't think were gonna make it as a species. and even if we could keep going, should we?

[@neilsanghvi5229]

Tigers in SPAAAACE

[@DayDay2685]

What a buzzkill! Being alone in the universe is more scary than not

[@mikemike3760]

Actually being alone is a good thing because it increases the chance that we are ahead of the great filter.

[@mccain334]

@@mikemike3760 No it just means that it hasn't even started yet

[@mikemike3760]

@@mccain334 not true but you can believe what u want

[@costinnitu3813]

@@mikemike3760 The funny thing is that being alone makes both scenarios plausible...meaning that we might be one of the first civilizations (the great filter is in the far future) or we might be one of the last (the great filter is in the near future). It's funny because we don't know our position in this scenario...yet.

[@theexchipmunk]

I would say one thing you have try and get done at the first time is modern civilisation and technology. The resources we use right now would be impossible to come by with older technologies as the easier to reach ones are already depleted. So if we were to crash and burn right now it is unlikely that humanity will ever reach the same stage of development we are at right now again, as the future generations would be lacking the resources to create the technologies needed for the development of modern society.

[@rasiabsgamingcorner2258]

I'd argue that it's more scary if we do find life...... Because that means that our great filter trial hasnt happened yet and that when it happens more than likely our survival won't happen

[@unnamedchannel1237]

“Something out there is killing everything and you are likely next, think about it” do we clap now ?

[@JabberCT]

1:59 I don't get what he is trying to say. You can't detect life by looking at galaxies in a deep field image. Them structures he is putting on the screen would have to be billions of light years across to see them. Why would any civilization do that? And as far as us not finding life yet, we have not looked very far. I heard someone say this once. That its like walking into the pacific ocean with a dixie cup, filling it up, looking inside, and then saying there are no fish in the ocean.

[@AlexMcCombie2100]

Life projects its presence even in the reflected light of a planet - oxygen doesn't occur in significant quantities on dead planets.

[@charlesalexanderable]

The milky way is only 100,000 light years across, not billions (I'm not sure about the specific galaxies in his picture). Before showing that slide he gives the speed of expansion that he used: something on the order of the speed at which the stars orbit.

[@randar1969]

what he fails to mention or people fail to realize is that with time passing in our culture so is our need for energy growing for now we are stuck to get what the planet can give us and perhaps a small fraction of sunlight that happen to fall on this rock in space. if you take thousand of galaxies in the hubble deep view picture each ranging from size way smaller till much larger then the milky way then you talk about billions of light years. some planets will be younger then ours some will be much much older remember the energy from earlier if even 1 out of the billions and billions of planets out there would be using more energy the the sun is producing we could detect it with current level space telescopes and we see nothing.....

[@leomarkaable1]

@@randar1969 what?

[@oknar1977]

@@leomarkaable1 he is talking about A Dyson sphere and in 2016 it was detected - yet media very quickly dismissed it. Which brings me to my point - perhaps the alien life was already found, but it is kept secret for our own good.

[@blindjoe8300]

Maybe they just left physical reality. What if death is the only way to advance?

[@jakek9418]

the future is unwritten but his statistical analysis is helpful

[@jbird1777]

Very nice speech!

[@keithirvine1]

Judging from all the idiotic comments below, no filter is needed.......mankind is it's own filter.

[@flavioabdenur3963]

* its

[@mattnoce7558]

I think the view that we’ve based these filters already and that it’s extremely difficult for life to develop it’s more likely. If the filter of life was easy to pass we would see something out there. It’s more likely that we’re alone than the universe being filled with life.

[@smokegames1179]

I'm stoned and this is hard to follow haha

[@NovusIgnis]

Don't be stoned then.

[@augustadawber4378]

The answer to the Fermi Paradox. There is a beautiful loving Universe many people claim they experience when they are undergoing an NDE. Long before any Advanced Civilization gains the technology necessary for Interstellar Travel - they find a way to escape to that Universe. In other words, it is technologically easier to get to that other very pleasant and safer place, than it is to develop the Type II Civilization Technology necessary for Interstellar Travel. This explains why we have found no sign of an Advanced Alien Civilization anywhere in the Universe.

[@ironcote6346]

If their was a university class for only this I would take it

[@daddyleon]

It also needs to be non-aquatic life that has something like hands to actually make stuff efficienty.

[@SebaQuiros]

And that something is the Reapers

[@theexchipmunk]

Or simply a combination of pollution, nuclear technologies and war.

[@RapunzelASMR]

LOL I love you

[@TenOrbital]

Uncertain applause at the end

[@theheatshow8324]

this is a time-traveling machine

[@m.cproductions3671]

As soon as I heard his opening sentence, all I could think of was the Lord of Light phrase from Game of Thrones ( "the night is dark & full of terrors") 😂

[@maximuscomfort]

Thank you for this video. If any planet makes it to humans a million years ahead of us they would have no fear of filters. As gods, would advertise to the universe at large they are in charge or are the word.

[@mcconlogue1898]

Our perception of the physical universe is extremely limited. Life may be non physical. Who says consciousness requires carbon based form to exist.

[@maezfkd]

This dude is distracting with his weird laugh thing he does after almost everything he says

[@XV250]

A nervous snort...

[@jenniferlawrence1372]

I couldn’t finish it, it was so irritating.

[@mcconlogue1898]

Creepy

[@babyysteps]

I didn't see/notice any weird laugh.

[@TheGoodContent37]

If we don't see anyone that made it is more likely that we won't make it than assuming we will be the ones that make it. We are doomed. We could even analyze the wishful thinking of we being the ones that make it to calculate how far away the next ones that made it are.

[@ericanderson3534]

He briefly mentioned the possibility that Earth has a early jump start by passing life's code here from somewhere else.

[@DieFlabbergast]

If you can believe in something like the Panspermia hypothesis, you might as well just go the whole hog and believe in a god.

[@daxw3960]

If we’re speaking statistically here, I feel like it’s much more likely that the filter is behind us. I mean if you think about it, we’re probably less than one or two hundred years away from establishing colonies on other planets in our solar system, which would make it exponentially more difficult for an extinction level event to wipe out all of a species. So unless the filter occurs in that century long window, a very slim window in the grand scheme of time, then it seems like we’ll soon be past the stage where extinction is likely to occur.

[@wojciechgac]

Well, if you're going the statistical route, that leaves you with essentially two options: - You can try to generalize a set of data points and extract some collective properties of the ensemble. That's hard, given that we only have the single data point of ourselves. - You can postulate a largely uniform distribution (our being what we are and in our rough circumstances is some evidence pointing to this being typical for intelligent life out there. Given the second option, we do not really have the comfort of looking how things went for the others, since we don't see any "others". So our perception of what is likely or unlikely in the domain of building a space-faring civilization is largely guesswork. Perhaps it look like one or two hundred years from the inside. But perhaps you're vastly underestimating the difficulty of the task. Now, I'm not saying the above to pop your balloon or to spread defeatism. I'm just trying to apply rational reasoning to estimates and keep them separate from our hopes and dreams. Myself, I'd love it if we were able to set off towards the stars and create a thriving cosmic empire.

[@wthellfuck]

It gives me hope when there's no hope.

[@rwutube]

Xenomorphs... I knew it.

[@charlesvillebrun536]

humanity is great at adapting .. and turning that adaptation into something viable that the rest of humanity could use in everyday life .. and we will continue to do so .. why .. because we are a curious specie's .. so even if we come to terms with our existance and we end up co-existing without all the things that are plaguing our civilization at present .. we will continue to exist because we are also .. stubborn ..

[@gzilla1149]

Early in the morning I must use a coffee filter, or I'll go extinct!

[@ushnishroy3095]

Who's watching after the pandemic?

[@FOLIPE]

That's supposing, of course, that as of now we are in the right path.

[@casiopistachio1107]

He touched on some nice points in this video. My personal reasoning is that the favourable evoloutional mechanics that helped form us are no longer compatible with the fast paced modern technology/social structure that we live in now. For example, greed and jealousy helped our ancestors survive and thrive, this trait has been a key driving force behind our success, but now that we live in a world that can provide every need, that trait is no longer sustainable which leads to class divide, war, unsustainable energy ect which have further knock on effects. I think if we had developed to now with a type of hive mind, the use of resources may be more sustainable, choices on the world stage may be made to genuinely benefit everyone, personal sacrifices on mass could be a powerful tool. I think one of the great filters is overcoming your own nature as a species and the ability to think logically and plan long term, there may be very little room for emotion in this equation.

[@octodude6815]

A fascinating topic. I've seen a number of different presentations on it. This was easily the least informative and least clear I have yet seen.

[@FreakyLynx]

Can you recommend another discussion on this topic that ranks higher in your opinion?

[@octodude6815]

@@FreakyLynx Good question! I probably shouldn't have been so snarky and critical. But if it helps someone find better information, I guess maybe it's not all bad? Anyway, there are a lot of good videos on this subject, so here are just a couple of suggestions... If you want the short and sweet version, I would recommend, "Why Alien Life Would Be Our Doom", by the youtube channel, "Kurzgesagt - In a Nutshell". If your interest level has you wanting to dig deeper, Arthur Isaac (also here on youtube) has an awesome series of videos on the Fermi Paradox and Great Filters, as well as a whole host of other great space-related videos. He has a speech impediment, so don't let that surprise you, but also don't let it stop you, because his content is really smart, well-considered, and well-informed. Dude knows his stuff. Anyway, I hope that helps!

[@commentingaccount1383]

I mean, we know there are that many solar systems out there, but we've come nowhere near to analyzing all of them for signs of life. In fact in some of the very few we have analyzed, we see atmospheres composed of carbon isotopes in the same ratio as life on earth produces, which while not proof of life is fairly encouraging. I personally think the great filters is that, any sufficiently intelligent creature will simply destroy itself like humanity is in the process of doing. Or perhaps inter-galactic/stellar colonization is simply a physical impossibility for an organic being complex enough to produce a civilization

[@EV50400]

I don’t doubt that there are a series of filters that all civilizations encounter along the way to technological advancement, but what often gets forgotten in Fermi Paradox discussions is the ability of the universe to have been able to sustain life at all up until a few billion years ago. In other words, it may be largely irrelevant that the universe itself is 13.8 billion years old because up until 2-3 billion years ago the universe may have been too unstable and precarious for intelligent life to evolve at all. To me, that’s the most likely answer to the Fermi Paradox.

[@NomenNominandum]

And then there is the mysterious "triple coincidence/why now problem" in cosmology which suggests that there is a deeper reason why we are around just now.

[@NomenNominandum]

And then there is the mysterious "triple coincidence/why now problem" in cosmology which suggests that there is a deeper reason why we are around just now.

[@pawbard]

PLOT TWIST: SF writer Alastair Reynolds is actually writing NONFICTION!

[@larrycrabs5995]

All this assumes life as we know it. What if life srose elsewhere that evolved differently with different building blocks.

[@husher5142]

We cannot even observe our entire sky of just our planet, what makes anyone think we can determine billions of planets are "dead". It's a half hearted arguement. A filter likely exists, there are a lot of variables to succeed at and a lot of variable to over come in a migration or expansion. It's extremely likely for that to be at the very least a billion to 1 or more and be an very small window for success. Even if we look at earth specifically we have plenty of intelligent creatures humans, octopods, etc, but only humans have the ability to affect their environment and develop tools. So out of 5 million species or more (over 100 million when you consider bacteria etc) only 1 complex life showed enough potential to transit - And we have yet to prove we can survive the next 300 years let alone long enough to migrate worlds in any capacity.

[@ExcessCongruence]

The Reapers are coming!

[@bernardfrancisco1640]

He wasn't wrong about Pandemic. That's for sure.

[@omkarkadu9854]

6:57 okay now we know

[@neiladlington950]

Another "filter" could genetic fatigue; mutations and environmental conditions becoming too burdensome and sudden for us to genetically adapt to.

[@tibodeclercq2131]

Limassol, makes me think about AEl Limassol and Apollon Limassol. This must be in Cyprus, not?

[@jamesblunt006]

A whole talk about that the great filter is more likely ahead of us, but his conclusion is that "there's something out there likely to kill us"? Seems to me that he's forgetting the most likely great filter. As far as we know, every organism that doesn't live in a sustainable balance with its habitat is bound to die off because of depleted resources. Our population size and resource consumption has increased to the point where it's clearly not sustainable. Also we're changing our own habitat and its climate so much that possibly we can't survive in it. We likely only have a few years, maybe decades to solve the climate problem, but we don't really have a solution or the even will to solve it, individual interests are too big. So my take is that the great filter that takes out most civilizations is in the civilization itself once it reaches a technical age. They simply don't manage to switch from growing and fighting over resources and depleting them, to a sustainable level that allows them to live long enough to leave their own planet or solar system, within the short timeframe they have after they reach a technological age. We're likely not going to make it if we continue like this, and we're far from solving these global problems threatening our very existence because of individual interests.

[@Haxete]

A potential solution is to stop reproducing more than we need to, we are becoming way too many people on the earth, if we globally limit the headcount then we can survive for longer, right?

[@tacosforlife5743]

Omg this reminds me of the lovex deathx robots episode on netflix. The freezer one

[@leomarkaable1]

Regarding reproduction...today the impoverished continent of Africa is doing most of the reproduction. I can't see any lasting improvements to their continent given the reproduction.

[@jamesblunt006]

​@@leomarkaable1 Reproduction is generally high in developing countries, and goes down once the living standard gets higher. It's not the other way round - reproduction rate goes down as a result of decreased poverty. It's a normal process, has happened in Europe, North America and Asia too. The only way to get the reproduction rate down in Africa is to decrease poverty. Which will only be possible if European, North American and Asian countries stop exploiting them.

[@jamesblunt006]

@@leomarkaable1 Also, despite the higher reproduction in African countries, the developed world (Europe, North America and parts of Asia) use up 99% of the world's resources and cause 99% of the world's climate emissions. The poorest countries are not the problem, even if they had 10x higher reproduction rate.

[@TheGoodContent37]

Maybe the filter is a mutation that supports life forms that can withstand living in space. Like tardigrades for example.

[@orionl.8491]

3 questions. How many species are on earth? How many are intelligent? How long have they had to evolve?

[@conquistador497]

@Maiahi dinosaurs would have been the dominant species on earth if it werent for them going extinct

[@conquistador497]

@Maiahi of course we can maneuver around them, that is a possibility that not that likely but then you gotta say where would we be today and would we be at this level that we are now. I do not think wed be the dominant species bc there couldve been another organism that could better maneuver and developed better cognitive functions that us

[@a.i.dagodd1015]

We are either the FIRST planet with intelligent life or the LAST. Those are the only possibilities

[@cenzoredworld]

Too many assumptions. "The universe is dead" How the hell does he know, with looking at stars a long time ago? No, to presume to "see intelligence" with our simple methods of observation is ridiculous, why should we necessarily be able to "see" sentient being or any other life form for that matter. Could we "see" our civilization from billions of light years away?

[@KossolaxtheForesworn]

that is true. I suppose they are just tiny bit hysteric and making assumptions. I think it would be smarter to prepare to destroy them if they are coming for us than to whine about how we are gonna all die. hell yeah we gonna die, but I want to shoot some aliens before that.

[@bboyfan22]

cenzoredworld we're not talking about billions of light years. only about 100,000 light years (the diameter of our own galaxy). If stars have been forming for billions of years already then there should have been life within our own galaxy well before we got here. further more we are set to send probes to the nearest star in the next 50years. imagine how much of the Galaxy we should have probs around in the next 1000 years... which isn't a long time compared to billions. all a civilization would need is a couple thousand year head start on us technologically and they should be visible to us pretty apparently is they ever decided to colonize space in any meaningful way.

[@katiekat4457]

IniTial91 okay even if it's only 100,000 light years it is ridiculous to be so optimistic and silly. We can't send 10,000 probes out to space but don't you realize how long it takes to get there? Nothing moves at the speed of light and even if our probes did we would still be waiting 100,000 light years to get there and another 100,000 years for the fastest possible signal to return. Now come back to reality. It will take the probes easy millions of years to arrive to their destinations and again add another 100,000 years for the answer signal to return to Earth. How likely is it that we will still be here and alive by the time we just find out whether there is other life or not. Let alone the thought of trying to travel there. I have no idea where you could possible come up with the probes out there finding out things in a 1,000 years. You are clueless.

[@katiekat4457]

cenzoredworld I agree that we could be looking right at life and no be able to detect it. Personally, I don't see any point in even thinking about it. Idk why we need to know so badly. Sure it's interesting to know if life is out there but I really feel that it is way too arrogant to think that there is not. I'm sure life exists out there somewhere but I doubt we will ever know. Space is expanding faster than the speed of light so anything out there is not going to be reachable. We have a finite amount of time before life as we know it ends and I don't think that we can do anything about it. Ever. But that is little worry to me because I will have already moved onto whatever is next. I don't believe in God but I'd like to think that it's too miraculous for me to be alive for it to just be the end. Especially since we don't know what life actually is and may not be visible after we die. But again no need to worry because if there isn't anything else I won't know and it will just be the end. No fear, no pain, no scary thoughts. Idk understand why we look for other life? Like I said other than for just knowing we are not so special and again I feel like I already know the answer which is of course there's other life. It's like looking for a needle in a haystack. We know the needle is there but is it really worth looking for?

[@lubu2960]

Katie Kat yes, it is.

[@FabianLandwehr]

I respectfully disagree with his advise that we should be worried about having this great filter ahead of us. We humans have no control over the placement of this postulated great filter, therefore worrying about it would be ineffective and simultaneously destructive as it decreases the quality of our present lives.

[@WatchfulHunter]

Celestial civilizations could have existed thrived and lasted a million years here in our own galaxy and even in our own solar system. But if that was 100 million years ago, what evidence would be left to prove it?

[@paulpatton41]

The unstated, but dubious, assumption of Hanson's argument is that, for a technological civilization, endless economic and population growth is inevitable. Hanson's "great filter" may simply be that successful civilizations realize that building huge readily detectable megastructures is a pointless enterprise. Hanson's proclamation that its all dead, simply because we don't see such megastructures is absurd. In fact, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) has so far been very limited and chronically underfunded. Proclamations like Hanson's help to keep it that way.

[@lisaj2269]

I am always amazed at how these arguments just start from the assumption that life would lead to colonizing the universe. Like that's such an easy task. We can think of ways in theory to do it, but in practice it's unbelievably hard. We can't even get out of our solar system and we're assuming intergalactic travel would inevitably be mastered. It's like they don't realize what huge amount of space we are talking about between even two close stars. The amount of energy and resources needed and time are incomprehensible. But because the universe isn't like Star Trek that means there's no life or there's a great filter etc. this is all science fiction. The Fermi paradox. There very well could be intelligent life on a nearby star system. Living like we did a couple hundred years ago. Or animal life. Or more advanced life. The argument that well there's no dearth vadar and no Vulcans and where are all the warp drive space ships... there must be a filter or we're the only living things is so inane

[@tomasr.2945]

What irks me the most is the assumption that all possible life has to be as we know it: carbon based, and oxygen supported; that life cannot exist in any other form. Not necessarily!! There are microbes and bacteria living and thriving in lava vents in the ocean. Tardigrades that can live almost anywhere. Slime in Chernobyl that uses photosynthesis from the radiation. Anaerobic bacteria that uses chemosynthesis. Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that life can only exist in the Goldilocks zone of other planets.

[@autoclearanceuk7191]

30 kilometers per second, or 67,000 miles per hour.

[@patclark2186]

I agree..But If there are star spanning civilizations Someone has got to be first. It may be us. (maybe)

[@sanethoughtspreader]

What about destruction of habitat? I.e. runaway global warming /destructions of ecosystems? Surely that's the most obvious great filter at the moment?

[@gregstewart6429]

This guy is certainly "cold and empty" like his filter universes. We will have to wait for the dead bit :)

[@lovepirate14]

I have a simpler explanation than all of this. What if in order for complex life to arise, you need a supreme being outside the boundaries of the physical universe to guide and create that?

[@niensaddestofthesad8151]

God? Nah! So many potholed in god theory But believe what you want.

[@justincase7686]

dont they understand the light we se from these others stars is millions of lights year old and life can be zoom all around but that light has yet to reach us

[@justinwahl8465]

Fermi's paradox and the Great filter is so ridiculous. It is literally what you get when you apply "Manifest Destiny" to Astrophysics, Biochemistry, Evolutionary biology, and Socio-Economics. Except all of these processes, scientists claim to be blind, random processes. Those who believe in this kind of Manifest Destiny for life in our universe, they operate on blind faith -- not scientific reason.

[@aknightthatsaysnee5259]

I like how the video ends with the words on the screen: Everything you know is wrong. BUT i also like how the speaker spells out the fatalistic view of life as seen by an atheist. That being said, what's the point?....of conservation, of equal rights, etc, etc. It's all about self. Self preservation, what's in it for me? Selfishness. What a sad way to be.

[@darthphantomius411]

We're in a simulation people.. Our simulator gods are laughing at us rn..

[@HarryNicNicholas]

this is actually my simulation, sorry, but you're just entertainment.

[@Griffondor1]

Say he's right and the universe is filled with death (of former civilizations on other planets) instead of unconscious energy. I see two possibilities:1)the killer is merciful and mechanical (a created non sentience) made by a civilization who discovered a "worse than death" scenario and is mercifully stopping any other sentient being from going through what they did or 2) all living things are interdependent on not just themself but other species, their sun, the magnetic resonances of earth and planets & moons in their solar system and are unable to survive beyond. Number 2 makes more sense because number one would be almost impossible to make--a merciful non sentience. It's a contradiction in terms.

[@who-man7699]

The great filter now isn't that a name? I have some serious doubts when my tiny mind tries to think of anything remotely like this I really could used or needed at least 10 more points on my IQ. I honestly have 1 major question and that is did anyone take and figure into the equation of just how crowded the universe was after the bang or what ever now I know that I am stepping into the deep end of the pool 2 seconds after learning what water is but if we go off the fact that it was nothing then BANG everything then we also have to take into effect that stuff was crowded and that we could not put a stop watch on any developing until the time that 50% of the solar bodies that existed made it 5 million years without a catastrophic impact then start tbe clock and I think that is way way to early I really truly think at least half the age of everything should be the time to consider it possible then take into effect the chances of random impacts just look at our moon and how often it's been blasted and I really think that if we were to look back at the area of the big bang and if we were to see a sign of life then we are in trouble because any civilization that was able to become advanced that fast and in such dangerous areas and time they became that way from utilizing the dangers to there advantage and they made great leaps because of it and that will be what they know and what they expect ravagers

[@mvvagner]

u wot m8?

[@jpancake84]

And a civilization 10 billion light years away from us wouldn't see us yet. So maybe we start looking not through out the universe, but at "neighbors" in the milky way that have existed almost as long as us but not that far away.

[@savedsteve1988]

we die from sin sin bringeth forth death

[@FearTheUnnKnown]

God is fake

[@barbh6987]

Did Einstein say if a society gets smart enough to colonize a planet it would destroy itself before actually doing it. We are just about there??

[@jamesdean44775]

Prophesying our doom with glee

[@kinagrill]

Pandemic you say.... Also it might be that humanity here on earth is the earliest development of more complex life in the universe. So that initial step of something simplistic and multicelullar is the biggest filter there is, and even tho billions of years are a lot of time... perhaps life as a whole jsut takes a lot of time. Scary thing about that is that we are then the pioneers of advanced life and thus we have no guidelines to follow, no pre-knowledge of 'well we can see others made it and are out there travelling the stars'... Nope, we have to look at a dead galaxy, potentially dead universe and stumble on through it all by ourselves, weather through all the natural disasters a more advanced civilization might be able to help with, deal with the whole technological development through trial and error before we might find the correct and functional way to get around the whole 'lightspeed issue' so a wider galactic civilization can become a possibility, etc.

[@katiekat4457]

I wouldn't call the other planets "dead". Dead implies that it was once living. What we see so far is "no life" not "dead".

[@markoklajn6026]

Well you didnt actually "see" 10x28 of planets you are talking about, only about 1600 planets are discovered by now...so is it OK to extrapolite to that dimensions on a subject like this...?

[@polyglotdreams]

"if it weren't dead" ... subjunctive

[@DemonSLZ]

the 3 possible senario ... more of us part.. wat if there isnt enuf of us to count as a lot ?

[@Renatus_Eruditus]

6:20 Is it me or did he just say "eukarytes"? XD

[@mobilityproject3485]

show this to a f*cking oil executive. big news for the rest of us.

[@RobertMOdell]

Its not a problem for there to be no other life in the universe.

[@andscifi]

It is if the reason there is no life in the universe is that everything is killed off because it mean's we're going to be killed off.

[@guitarnotebook]

Why do the try-try filters take about the same time to complete, and how does it follow that the expected completion time of such filters is 2 billion years?

[@jazzman1904]

We've had 5 major extinctions destroying over 90% of life on earth each time. These are filters that life has overcome to produce us. Perhaps other solar systems in the galaxy have been more stable and produced intelligences so far ahead of us that they are invisible to us.

[@honestlymars]

6:57 Why hasn't anyone made *the* comment yet?

[@jasmineluxemburg6200]

Information takes time to cross vast distances even of our galaxy. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence !

[@chrisreid5745]

Or maybe other aliens are comfortable right where they are.

[@joecaballero1256]

asteroids and comets are not an uncommon way the earth could go through a cataclysmic event. We are pretty lucky tbh. *knock on wood*

[@connorm5478]

I think the "filter" they are using for who gets on stage and who don't might have failed here.