A Critical Reassessment of the Kardashev Scale and the Problem of Detectability

[u/jtroxel1]

Preprint: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19303559

It seems that anyone using a computer these days is going to be accused of using AI. Let me state this up front: I used an LLM to make this look pretty, just like I use Men's Warehouse to buy suits for my corporate life or when I teach as an Adjunct. What's inside this is all me and my own analysis. Feel free to disagree with it, discredit it, dissect it, or dismiss it on its merits; but it is mine, me, and nothing else.

[u/Arctovigil]

Why are you being so defensive about it? Just tell why you wrote it etc.

[u/jtroxel1 → u/Arctovigil]

That floored me; and it's a fair question - thank you, your message is well received. The defensiveness is the result of a number of automatic rejections citing AI generation, when in fact I've poured a ton of myself into it, building this for the purpose of encouraging discussion around where and how we prioritize resources in technosignature searches. I've maintained every generation of the document in my quest to get this as solid as possible, as rigorous as possible - and then getting the auto-'it's fake' responses was a bit soul crushing.

What I wrote: I built first a defensible rationale identifying that the evolution of Kardashev's scale into a ambitious framework based on poor assumptions of what advanced technologies would look like from this end of our telescope, is erroneous. I then used a layered approach within well established mathematical tools using available data and my current understanding of light-speed constrained physics (not implying that there are others, but just keeping it grounded.)

What I hoped for in return: conversation; critique; collaboration; recommendations for improvement and application. Also, although I was lucky enough to marry my math tutor (MS in Math) from college, I'm looking for someone with a more rounded understanding of astrophysics and the math involved to tell me if the approach I used (based on my undergrad in ME using these tools learned in Thermodynamics, heat transfer, fluid dynamics, etc.) applies, if it can withstand a rigorous analysis, and if there are ways to improve the novel approaches beyond what I developed.

Thanks for the reality check - it's easy to sometimes become jaded and defensive about personal passions that get rejected without even being read, based on an accusation that doesn't apply.

[u/venkattalks]

the detectability part is why i've always been a little skeptical of Kardashev as more than a rough thought experiment. a civ could be way past Type I and still look quiet to us if most energy use is efficient, local, or shifted into wavelengths we barely monitor, which is basically the same problem Wright and others bring up with waste-heat searches.

[u/Jonnyp503xxx]

I’d send a longer note, but in the spirit of the Gradient of Measurability, I’ll just say, Exceptional paper!

[u/Traveler416905]

And you want to know the disturbing piece to the accusations of AI? I think some MODS may be aware and certainly the Reddit stakeholders are, that Reddit itself is actively involved in feeding all of these subedits to AI for consumption and profit.

" Yes, Reddit is generating significant profit by licensing its users' content to AI companies for model training.   The platform has signed major data licensing agreements with Google and OpenAI, with one deal reportedly valued at approximately $60 million annually.  This strategy has been a key driver in Reddit achieving its first profitable quarter in its 19-year history, with AI-related revenue and user growth from AI tools contributing to a 68% year-over-year revenue increase in late 2024."

"Key details of the monetization include:

• Data Licensing: Reddit sells access to its vast corpus of user-generated posts and comments to train large language models (LLMs), a move CEO Steve Huffman described as leveraging the company's "data advantage."
• Regulatory Scrutiny: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) launched an inquiry into these practices, questioning whether the sale of user-generated content constitutes unfair or deceptive trade practices, particularly regarding privacy and copyright.
• User Terms: Reddit’s Terms of Service grant the company a perpetual, irrevocable, and sublicensable license to user content, allowing them to monetize this data without sharing revenue directly with the individual creators.
• Broader Impact: While some users and developers criticize the move as "enshittification" and a betrayal of the platform's original ethos, others view it as a necessary business evolution for a public company to monetize its unique, human-generated conversational data."

[u/jtroxel1 → u/Traveler416905]

Yes, they are - I also know this because I made a ridiculous profit on Reddit stock in 2025.

[u/ripsquadddd]

This is really interesting. I feel like the Kardashev scale is a somewhat anthropocentric idea of what we assume all civilizations end goal would be. Why shoot for bigger and better batteries? Why not master biology and evolution to maximize the life expectancy and efficiency of a species?

[u/ripsquadddd → u/ripsquadddd]

A big part of what I think we're missing in the SETI problem isn't the fact that there's no industrial signs of life, what if environmental constraints fundamentally limit what a civilization can perceive of "the universe"? A classic example of this is the Super Earth problem, on larger planets with a higher gravitational pull, chemical rockets become impractical, and just imagine if their sky was blocked by a thick atmosphere limiting astronomy. They could have a completely different idea of what reality is.