Talk:Self-replicating spacecraft

Iain M Banks' Excession

I changed the paragraph concerning Iain M Banks' Excession, the idea of changing a Agressive swarm to a Evangalizing swarm was presented here (to my reading) as a main plot item from the book. Whereas, in the book, it is actually given as a example to illustrate how the Culture plans to deal with Outside Context Problems (although planning for OCP's is probably a oxymoron). The Excession object itself in the story is not Hegemonising (as the story is told, although if it truely mimics/replays the actions of those it encounters it might become Hegemonising if something tries to Hegemonise it). EasyTarget 13:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

i thought it was the zetetic elenchs way of dealing with its own members that had been subsumed by an AHS. it is in the passage describing the difference between the elench and the culture; the culture seeks to change other civilisations, whereas the elench seeks to be changed by them.

Link #1

Link #1 is broken.

borg @ see also

re: "The Borg are not von Neumann probes. They apparently don't even reproduce by non-assimilative means, according to later Voyager episodes." (edit comment by Bryan Derksen)
being listed in "see also" does not signify anything more than a similarity of topic... otherwise, please explain how "interstellar travel" is a Von Neumann probe... - Blueshade 15:32, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't see the similarity to von Neumann probes at all, really. They're not machines, they're not probes, andy they don't self-replicate. They're machine-like, but if that's all that's necessary then there are dozens of other fictional alien species that would fit equally well in here. "Interstellar travel" is not a von Neumann machine, as you say, but it does seem reasonably relevant to the subject of probes designed to travel to other stars - they must perform interstellar travel to do so. How are the Borg relevant? Bryan 23:48, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

the article mentions aggressive objects from Banks' Excession... they replicate and in the process are determined to turn everything into copies of itself... i thought the borg are somehow similar in behavior to this in that they also seek to turn everything into, well not exactly copies, but into beings similar to themselves...but ok, maybe you are right, this might be too little to justify inclusion in 'see also'... best regards, Blueshade 20:27, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Merging of Berserker probe

I've just re-merged Berserker probe back into here. Beowulf's de-merge only reintroduced all the problems I'd originally done the merge to resolve, namely the large amount of redundant material between the two - the "examples in fiction" lists were nearly identical. I brought this up back in February on Talk:Berserker probe. If you still disagree, Beowulf, please explain in more detail here on talk. You didn't say anything in any of the edit summaries. Bryan 01:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Gladly. If you want to take out the Beserker fiction references in the main article, that's fine - but follow the reasoning was behind the break out.

The Von Neumann Probe is a general concept. The other 3 variants are instances of the general concept. Both the Astrochicken and the EIS are broken out as specific articles. If you are going to roll Beserker into the main article, roll the other two in as well (if possible - I doubt it given the state of Embryo space colonization), or keep Beserker "rolled out".

In short, treat all instances of the general class the same.

As it stood - and I guess as it stands again - it's akin to having an article on Porche, and having all the models broken out into their own individual pages EXCEPT the 911 which you just jam in the main page for the hell of it.

If you want to roll the Besrker back into the main page, then for balance of presentation, the Astrochicken and the EIS should have their own "write ups" in the Von Neumann probe article, and you're back to large-scale duplication of information.

What you've done is sacrificed consistancy in how the information is handled from "case to case" to save 30k of text duplication. The pages already exist.

It doesn't really matter to me if you have similar summary sections for the other two, or roll out Beserker again - as long as there is consistancy of treatment.

• Von Numann Probe Variants
  • Beserker
  • EIS
  • Astrochicken

Beowulf314159 01:58, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

As I see it embryo space colonization is a completely separate topic - it's quite possible to launch an embryo space colony with a non-replicating starship, and in fact both of the fictional treatments that I've encountered were like that (Williamson's Manseed and Hogan's Voyage from Yesteryear). It can be used in conjunction with a self-replicating probe, but so can terraforming (for example) - it's an add-on technology. I'll add a section for it, though, to discuss its application specifically in conjunction with self-replicating probes. As for the astrochicken, that's not a whole separate class of von Neumann probe. It's just one specific proposed design, much like how Project Daedalus or the Starwisp are specific proposed designs for non-replicating interstellar probes. I don't think it should be portrayed as the same sort of division as the berserker/non-berserker one. This page is about a general concept. Bryan 05:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok - you have some good points. I still think that it still needs to be adjusted however.

As per your comments, yes it's possible to lauch a non-von-Neumann EIS. It's also quite possible to lauch a non-replicating warship, and - as NASA can tell you - it's certainly possible to launch non-replicating probes. Whether something can be accomplished without the use a self-replicating system may be immaterial to the discussion.

As for the self-replicating EIS I would suggest checking out the David Brin's story on the list. It mentions a case of a Von Neumann EIS. The entire text of the story is on the author's website.

I have to admit that the argument for the Astrochicken as a class is a weak one; it should not be on the same level.

I think the problem is that this page is not about the general concept, as you claim. Based on a common peice of terminology - von Neumann probe - we're trying to shoe-horn lots of non-von Neumann probe material in, becuase we don't have anywhere else to hang it. Really - what we have is a conceptual structure something like this.

• Self-replicating spacecraft (a specific class of Von Neumann machine). Note that it says in the article that the only thing all the various ideas in the article have is self-replication - which implies a "super-class" to me.
  • Von Neuman probes
    • Astrochicken
  • Beserker probes (von Neumann warships)
  • Von Neumann variant of the EIS (von Neumann seeders)
  • Possible others? (von Neumann terraformers?) - It wouldn't do to stuff all possible variants here - only those that have had some thought put into them and can be referenced elsewhere.

Von Neumann machines that happen to be starships are the "general concept". Variants on the idea that accomplish a specific tasks gives you probes, Beserkers, and Von Neumann EIS. Specific ideas for probes gives you Astrochicken.

How about a breakdown like the following?

• Abstract
• TOC
• General Concepts: Self-replication, speed of dispersal (can be expanded to increase some of the actual paper and mathmatics?), Fermi Paradox
• Applications
  • Von Neuman probes': Civilization monitoring, Arthur C. Clarke's, The Sentinel, etc.
  • Berserkers (Von Neumann warships)
  • etc. etc....
• References
• Appearances in Fiction

Best I can do pre-"coffee and breakfast" :) - Beowulf314159 14:06, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I like that breakdown, and agree with your points about shoehorning things into an inappropriate superclass (Berserkers rarely seem to spend much effort on scientific probe-type activities, after all :). What would be a good title for an article about the superclass, "self-replicating spacecraft" perhaps? "von Neumann machine" is an ambiguous term since it's also used to describe an unrelated computer architecture, so this could be an opportunity to clarify that as well.

Should I take a crack at implementing this reorganization, or would you like to take this turn? I don't want to seem like I'm dictating the article's structure. Bryan 20:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Heh - I think the punishment for suggesting anything that is going to require work is to make someone do it - so I guess it's my responsisibility - if you can wait until tomorrow (EST) :)

I'm not sure what would make a good "super-class" title. It's a type of Von Neumann machine, but I've been tracking the kerfuffle over the Von Neumann machine page. Self-replicating spacecraft are s really a sub-class of "Clanking Replicators" (as macroscopic VNMs) - not just VNMs. Von Neumann Probe gets linked to a lot, I think. It might not be 100% accurate but less hassle to just leave it in place, and make it clear in the abstract sumamry that we need to disucss the general concept first? We can always write the page in situ and move later as needed.

Beowulf314159 23:33, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Argh! Damn wikipedia is addicting! Ok - I've done a rough draft of the reworked layout. It can certainly stand polishing - but the structure is there. I can't spend any more time polishing tonight - I'll peek in on it later. - Beowulf314159 00:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Date reference

I ran across this article, and I've of course heard of gray goo, and I've seen the replicators in SG1 but never heard of Von Neumann. So the first thing to jump out at me was, WHEN DID THIS GUY LIVE, WRITE, whatever?

"Tides of Light"

In the novel "Tides of Light" by Gregory Benford, a giant space-faring organism falls down on a planet and plunders its resources for the sake of reproducing itself. Hugo Dufort 09:51, 22 November 2006 (UTC) Through the whole "Galactic Center" serie, mankind is at war with "machines" that have colonized much of the galaxy; they are berserker-like and actively seek and destroy intelligent biological life. Hugo Dufort 09:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Machines in "The Matrix"

Could the Machines of the Matrix be mentioned as an example of these self-replicators, even if they aren't interstellar mahcines? -- Nick Begovich 16:57, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't know of any evidence that they're spacecraft of any sort, so I don't see how they'd be relevant here. Perhaps at self-replicating machine? Bryan 03:11, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

On a related note, I've removed the reference to Agent Smith from the Matrix movies, as he is not a spaceship, he does not explore, and the Matrix is not the universe. This may be an appropriate example for the self-replicating machine page, however.--BlackAndy (talk) 11:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Startrek reference for Berserker

The Changling involved a merged probe named NOMAD. It acts as a Berserker Should It be mentioned along with V'Ger and the Whale Probe? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.9.223.94 (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

IMO V'Ger and the Whale Probe are quite marginal for inclusion here to begin with, they're not self-replicating. Perhaps in a more general "robotic killer spacecraft" article. Bryan 00:42, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Stupid statement

"Another objection to the prevalence of Von Neumann probes is that civilizations of the type that could potentially create such devices may have inherently short lifetimes, and self-destruct before so advanced a stage is reached, through such events as biological or nuclear warfare, nanoterrorism, resource exhaustion, ecological catastrophe, pandemics due to antibiotic resistance, etcetera."

Did someone just make this up? It makes no sense, why would aliens have to worry about bacteria (a earth-based life-form)? This objection needs some sort of reference. 66.75.250.202 02:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

No someone did not make this up, since we have never actually encountered an alien race we can only make basic assumptions about their possible physiology. All of these assumtions are, by necessity, based upon the only life forms we have intimate knowledge of...the ones here on earth. Furthermore, if we assume that life has evolved on other planets it can also be assumed that at least some of them would experience similar ecological difficulties ie. diseases, resource depletion, etc. Also it should be pointed out that since we've never been to another planet capable of supporting humanlike life, we have no way of knowing if bacteria is strictly an "earth-based" life form as you call it. It is perfectly plausible that life similar to, perhaps even nearly indistinguishable from, earth bacteria has evolved on hundreds or even thousands of planets. Once again, we have no extrasolar frame of reference on which to base assumtions about life elsewhere and until we do concepts and ideas will continue to be based upon earthly life. 64.238.49.65 (talk) 10:11, 31 December 2008 (UTC)mandragor.

The greater point is simply that any civilization of advanced technology is likely to reach the point where it's own technologies and accompanying issues of unforeseen consequences results in extinction before being able to create Von Neumann probes. For instance, Tipler argues somewhere that the cost of constructing Von Neumann probes falls over time. Eventually, one would cost the equivalent of $10 million USD to construct, and eventually a mere $4k. Surely *someone* would build one by that point, no? If anyone studies such things, it's likely demonstrable the cost of building a doomsday device will always be orders of magnitude below that of a Von Neumann probe. It could be argued the USA, as a whole, reached that point in the 1980s, with enough destructive power to end human existance if it's 270 million population sought to. The cost of such means lowers every year, perhaps a population of 10 million could achieve that status by 2020 if willed. Eventually, you reach the cost where a group of 1000 people, 100 people, etc could end all human existance, and given the current state of humanity surely some group somewhere would exercise that option at some point, no? There certainly are *individuals* who would take everyone they could with them in a grand finale. Anyways, personal dooms-day devices being bound to appear much earlier than personal Von Neumann probes - it almost seems self-evident any civilization will suffer self-inflicted doom before being able to colonize space.

And besides - if ETI's have no bacteria -- what exactly did life there evolve from, anyways?

76.104.181.252 (talk) 06:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Article move

Someone apparently moved the article to "Self-replicating spacecraft". However, the lead still bolds the article topic as "von Neumann probe". This is an inconsistency that should be resolved. I see no problem in moving the article to "Von Neumann Probe", and if there are no objections/explications, I will move the article there. Robert K S 12:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

There was a good reason to move the article as it encompasses more than just von Neumann probes. I'll give the lead paragraph a rewrite instead. Bryan Derksen 15:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Robert K S 19:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

"Simple workaround" = original research?

The following paragraph is uncited and seems to be original research:

A simple workaround exists to avoid the over-replication scenario. Radio transmitters, or other means of wireless communication, could be used by probes programmed not to replicate beyond a certain density (such as five probes per cubic parsec) or arbitrary limit (such as ten million within one century). Communication devices would be standard equipment on probes anyway, and thus only additional software, not hardware, would be required.

Not only does this seem like an unreferenced assertion, but it also misses the point. If autonomously operating machines are subjected to forces of natural selection, then succesive mutations may cause the emergence of robots that break these rules (e.g. ignore the radio transmitter). I'm tempted to delete this paragraph--what do others think? Alki 19:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The machines would undoubtedly perform cyclic redundancy checks or HMAC checks on their firmware, but those fail if an error happens inside the error checking code causing it to report that it is intact. Generally it is only something that can be mitigated because in enough time Murphy's law has ample opportunity to cause multiple faults in redundant systems. It could gain a great degree of stability by having several redundant and varied methods of error checking code on a single machine and if one or more of the checks disagree about the software's integrity, the machine shuts down. Abbail 20:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Titan A.E.

Could the Titan from Titan A.E. be considered a Replicating "seeder" ships for inclusion in the Examples in fiction section.(IRMacGuyver (talk) 00:27, 7 December 2007 (UTC))

Interesting article about von Neumann probes

I found a site which seems to be only half-ready but the content is extremely fascinating: http://vonneumann.tripod.com/index.html The author has very good points about why would somebody build von Neumann probe. What do you think of adding a new section to article with a title "Hypothetical reasons for building von Neumann probe" or "Sociology of von Neumann probes" or something like that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.27.61.61 (talk) 17:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

In fiction: Isaac Asimov

I don't remember from which book I read that, it was a while ago; But the robots in the foundation serie had sent machines in advance of the human race with orders of therraforming planets for the humans. In doing so, they destroyed a great deal of alien lifeforms. That earned mankind and the rebots the hatered of the remainig aliens (they were only uploaded minds tho at the time). Sorry if what i say is inconsistent I'm drunk right now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.171.143 (talk) 03:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Chrono Trigger

Although biological, (ie. the characters' assertions that it has DNA) I think Lavos from Chrono Trigger could be a good example of a Berserker/terraforming probe. It travels to a planet, significantly affects the development of intelligent species, and monitors/records all species of the life that appears on that planet for millions of years. At the end of its monitoring, it resurfaces, in doing doing so destroying almost all life on the planet, and creates a new life form based on the DNA information it's collected over the years. Finally, it sends out its children to other planets with that information in their DNA as well.

I put it here first because it would be significantly different from the other examples in the article, so I'm not sure it belongs. 64.202.157.11 (talk) 08:21, 17 January 2009 (UTC)