Skip to main content

Not "Mostly Harmless"

Future Interactions with Nature
Future Interactions with Nature

Adams, in Hitchhiker’s Guide, was clearly joking, which means we ought to consider potential answers to the following questions in light of space-travel prospects in the coming centuries:

Rights and responsibilities

  • Who owns, governs and protects what is found? What is the reason for these decisions? Who has the right to object to or change previously agreed arrangements under what circumstances? How do we take into account the varied opinions and power dynamics on Earth when making these decisions to ensure fairness (if that is, indeed, what we seek)?
  • What obligations are there towards future life(-forms) and cultures that develop away from Earth? How does this vary with species or with with planet of origin? What time horizons should be considered and why? How does that square with humanity’s past inability to predict the future or to predict the impact of technology-change with any degree of accuracy?
  • Do rights and responsibilities of humans and others depend on any ability to demonstrate intelligence or sentience, and if so why? How does this square with AI developments and our evolving understanding of the way different life-forms on Earth communicate (e.g. trees warning other trees of nearby disease)? How are differences of opinion arbitrated?
  • How does crime get policed and how does the judicial system work during long-distance space-travel or during colonisation of a newly discovered extra-terrestrial location?
  • Who benefits from humanity (over-)extending its reach?

Liabilities

  • What should standard space-travel terms and conditions look like, given the asymmetric power dynamics between companies and individuals, especially workers? How can we apportion risk to ensure it sits with the party best able to manage it?
  • How do we control non-financial, non-Earth-based risks in a way that considers long-term human and non-human interests? Who enforces the agreed rules? Why is that so?
  • How can Earth-based insurance policies be expected to extend to non-Earth situations given the inevitable lack of immediate access to quality data? What is the consequence of this?

Terraforming possibilities and limits

  • If certain changes to environments are desired by humans for safety, comfort or cultural reasons, what actions should be taken by humans and why? What other considerations should be weighed?
  • How are new technologies trialled and their implications fully explored without risk of unintended negative consequences impacting non-Earth environments? Who decides what risks to take? Who can object and why?

Cultural & psychological implications

  • Likely imminent cultural and psychological shifts for humanity could be significant, so what governance will be needed to facilitate good adjustment to the new perspectives on Earth and deep space? How will cultural and religious implications be felt on Earth by different communities, given the proportion of the Earth’s populace who are religious?
  • Given the effectiveness of marketing, advertising, propaganda, what messaging should be designed to support the human response to imagery of humans’ non-earthly activity? What risks psychological risks exist that can or cannot be mitigated?

Rules of engagement in case of cosmic warfare

  • Given the degree of disunity, disharmony and inequality on Earth, and given humanity’s previous track record in matters of war, what risk mitigation is necessary before humans embark on space-travel and colonisation to limit the impact of cosmic warfare on humans and non-humans? How will this be agreed upon, funded and enforced? How will long-term governance of such schemes be managed as technology and cultures develop? (Here I would consider the effectiveness of bodies such as the UN in recent military history)