The imperative of ending SETI Now

[madd0ct0r]

Query - would advancing a neighbours tech by sending them stuff be a good defense ?

The classic sci-fi trope: Our technology improved faster then out society - we were not ready for such things (and then destroyed ourselves/others/everyone)

but i'm semi-sure that recent research shows that by improving living standards (not necessarily a direct outcome of tech boost, but pretty probable) you help people get out of a 'live fast, die young' mentality. Since they have more vested in the future, they act more responsibly.

[Ariphaos]

I don't think that that would be terribly relevant at that point. You're concerned about the people in charge of the stellar output, not the average sapient being in the system, necessarily.

[Simon_Jester]

Yes.

A more restrained version of Sagan's "any advanced civilization will be peaceful" applies here. Any civilization that cannot restrain the destructive impulses of individual members will either not issue its potentially destructive tools to ordinary citizens, or will wind up in deep trouble having to deal with its own renegades, borderline cases, and political-agenda types. There are many ways for individuals to harm society that are far more expensive to fix than they are to cause.

An advanced civilization does not, strictly speaking, need to be peaceful... but their internal conflict resolution needs to be good enough that this isn't a serious problem for them.