Outside Context...Solution?

This subject a bit too advanced for 4chan?

>>8830454
It's no advanced it's just somewhat obscure. And what you mentioned as your first example isn't an outside context problem, which shows that calling anyone here retarded for not knowing about this subject is pretty rich, coming from you.
Not only that, but the very idea behind this thread is retarded. It's an outside context problem. Generally that means we can't do shit about it, short of the few we could trigger ourselves.

>>8832890
>And what you mentioned as your first example isn't an outside context problem
>Implying first contact won't be last contact with 100% certainty

>Generally that means we can't do shit about it
Did you even read what I wrote?

>short of the few we could trigger ourselves
Exactly. I'm looking for ideas of the triggers for the inverse.

wouldn't this take an impossible amount of calculating power and way too much tile to come up with a solution that may nkot even be effective? I don't believe in "divine intervention" but I understand if the physical reactions of the universe line up well enough then there is no human action that can appose the fillosing event.

>>8832923
No, just looking for any old idea. Take prayer for example. That would literally fit what I'm looking for. Just not that specifically. Looking for other ideas.

>>8832913
That not an out of context problem. That's partly know why yo know the result, we know what happens when a technologically advanced society meats a less technologically advanced one. That amonsgt other things.

>I'm looking for ideas of the triggers for the inverse.
That makes no sense. The whole problem about out of context problems are unknown unknowns, you almost by definition can't use it in your favor. It might end up working in your favor, but you can't know that.
Your second example works, but in that case the only thing we could do is avoid any and all experiments that bring about conditions that aren't commonly found in nature. Even then that would just remove a tiny sliver from a potentially unlimited pools of those problems ,and wold be merely avoiding the problem, not solving it.

>>8832923
>appose the fillosing event.
Did you have a seizure?

>>8832935
>That not an out of context problem.
Just because you know it's an ET doesn't mean it's not an OCP. The fucking thing was named from an ET encounter, or rather an encounter with an ET device. Stop picking nits (that don't actually exist) and offer ideas.

>you almost by definition can't use it in your favor
I've already covered all of this. There is a tiny amount of wiggle room and I'm looking for THAT.

Man plebs are just completely without any creativity. You'd rather all argue that I'm using the term incorrectly (I'm not), than offer any ideas, because you're literally incapable of crafting ideas.

>>8830454
i like Banks but this seems a bit silly. all human knowledge was once 'outside context'. we used experiments and risk taking to slowly figure out which plants were poisonous and which we could eat, we discovered/invented mathematics to establish internal consistency of our ideas, we used the scientific method to organize validate our theories and figure out what to test next.
an advanced intelligent being with properties we don't know, if it wants us dead, it will kill us. just like when some ancient caveman ate cyanide nuts and died so the rest of us could learn and live.

>>8832948
>You plebs are just without any creativity
Because your question is fundamentally retarded. Shit you even brought up prayer as a "possible solution". You're denser than a flat earther. And you did missuses it.
It's fine, you're a moron, eat paint. Better do what you were born to do than pathetically trying to reach like that.

>>8832957
Oh here we go. Some dumbass is going to intentionally act retarded so he can avoid being helpful when the question wasn't even difficult so he can seem (in his own mind) to be more intelligent than OP.

>And you did missuses it.
No, I didn't. You're just literally fucking retarded. And you're getting tiresome. Now leave.

>>8832970
>Now leave.
My pleasure really. I see enough crazy idiots daily and I had my fix already.

>>8832913
If the inverse of an outside context problem is outside context, then there is no known process for producing it.
Proof: suppose the outside context problem has a solution (otherwise the prolf is trivial), which by assumption of the premise is outside context. If there was a known process that produces that solution, then it would no longer be outside context, contradicting the assumed premise.

So any solution to an outside context problem, if it exists at all, is either inside context, or else impossible to produce by any known process.

>>8833101
>QED I'm smart :^)
Wrong. You, like all the other morons who've responded so far are only proving there is no intelligent life on this planet. I knew this was way beyond /pol/'s ability to grasp.

>>8833108
Such a butthurt, your question is retarded, you are retarded, and still you are the one who thinks is not being understood, you are another "open your eyes people", get out of /sci/

It ees, it ees.

>>8830454
wow king ur r sooo smart pl0x help me with mys homework since ur the 2nd cumming of einstien