From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Sat Jul 13 2002 - 02:27:46 MDT
marc_geddes wrote:
> I feel that in order for transhumanist memes to ultimately succeed, most of
> us will have to migrate to a Mars colony for at least a couple of decades.
If we cannot convince enough people on earth to transhumanist
memes and viewpoints then why do you believe we can convince
enough to finance and successfully launch a full-blown Mars
colony? It will cost 50 billion just for the first mission. In
the best of planning establishing a full colony that was not
only viable but had resources and free time to spare to work on
the many projects essential to full transhuman dreams would take
longer than our lifetimes. I fail to see how this is at all
realistic.
If it is in fact necessary to segregate ourselves with a group
of like-minded folk it seems more to the point to do so on earth
than to attempt to colonize a hostile environment.
>
> The reason: Political inertia and dogma on Earth. The current outmoded
> belief systems of this world have become too entrenched to be directly
> overcome.
I am not so sure. Belief systems can be changed or bypassed.
Starting your own country makes a lot of sense if something
completely different is called for. But, there is a cost in
terms of time and energy expended even then that must be
seriously weighed. The cost is MUCH higher if you are
attempting to survive in a hostile environment off-planet.
> Look at the US... it's the most creative, free society on Earth.
> But its government has grown into a many tentacled monster that is choking
> the
> life out of it.
>
Are you sure it cannot be dismantled and/or overhauled? I am not.
> Boy was I mistaken! You can't get rid of the anti-progress gang so easily.
> I found out that they had been infiltrating the US from within.... Rotting
> away at its insides for decades and decades. The names have changed but
> it's the same old gang. Rampant political correctness, environmentalism,
> post-modernism, religious views: the anti-progress gang has almost completed
> it's take-off of American universities and political life.
>
Political correctness and environmentalism are not the enemy.
The first is much over-proclaimed. The second contains truths
that must be faced along with some utterly idiotic notions and
some truly vile hijackers. Pick your enemies well. Many
question what real progress is and is not. This is quite
needed. Do not mistakenly assume they are all anti-progress or
part of some cabal. Do not lump all religious views together
either. Don't forget that much of the drive within religion was
for transcendence over many of the same things we wish to
transcend. Defining everyone but those who agree with you as
the enemy is not a promising start to establishing a new viable
community or even working cooperatively with enough people to
get much done.
> Most of the policies of the communist party of 1920 have been adopted. The
> US
> today is not what is was. If the founding fathers were alive they would
> weep.
> It's regulation.... Regulation and more regulation. Massive regulation at
> all levels. This is bad enough, but to cap it off we're seeing a resurgence
> of religious fundamentalism that is very disturbing to behold. Born-again
> Christians are everywhere. And remember that a militant black Muslim not so
> long ago succeeded in organizing a '1 million man march' on Washington.
>
What do you give? That its every transhuman-wannabe for
verself? Devil take the hindmost? And then you wonder why
there is backlash? How much compassion, how much honest desire
to lift the burden of humanity, do you see among us? Many of us
seem to lash out fairly blindly toward all who seem a threat to
whatever amount of dream we have some tenuous grasp on. I am
sorry, but I don't see that as any sort of vanguard of the future.
> And the US is supposed to be the most 'open society' on Earth. Everywhere
> else is even worse. (With the only possible exception being Britain)
>
Actually, most of Europe and Canada do not have our
fundamentalist crazies. Creationism is almost strictly an
American phenomenon (although I've heard the Turks are importing
it).
> Sorry if this seems a bit of a rant, but I'm only telling it like I see it.
> Under these conditions I do not believe that transhumanist memes can ever
> flourish, nor do I believe that its program for human enhancement will be
> allowed to proceed.
>
> Now I'm certainly not saying that transhuamanists should stop promoting the
> things they believe in. I'm just saying that I believe the battle cannot be
> won if you try to wage it from within the Western democracies as they stand
> at
> present.
>
> Now I saw some posts about 'libertarian enclaves', but the idea is not
> radical
> enough. These enclaves would still be in the US, and subject to government
> regulation. What about the idea of trying to form a new nation somewhere?
> Still not radical enough. To quote Robert Zubrin from 'The Case For Mars',
> "the cops are just too close"
>
Do you understand just how fragile a Mars colony would be for
decades? Even without any hostile intentions toward it from
outside?
> The posthuman world is going to require radically new politics and
> technology,
> which will never be permitted here on Earth. In short... we will need to
> move
> off world.
>
Do you know in any detail what these politics are and how they
will work? Wouldn't it be good to have a test run on terra
firma before attempting to run something as fragile as a space
or Mars colony by them?
> In "The Case For Mars" Robert Zubrin brilliantly makes the case for Mars as
> the logical choice for the first off-world colonies. Only on Mars do the
> right conditions exist.... (The most important being sufficient amounts of
> organic materials).
>
Yes. And his plan calls for decades before the colonies can
support any large number of people self-suficiently. Life on a
Mars colony will be hard for quite some time. Harder and more
time-consuming of every bit of energy than the life of your
great-grandparents. Is this what you want? To postpone the
dreams for a generation or two why we dig in on Mars?
> Transhumanists need to establish colonies on Mars that are free of political
> control from our Earth-bound friends. I'm not suggesting any particular
> political model... I think we will need to experiment with many different
> models. Different colonies will try different politics... it's a matter
There is not a lot of room for experiment under such conditions.
> of experimentation to see what works best. For instance we could have
> a libertarian colony, and another colony practicing something along the
> lines of James Hughes's 'Democratic Transhumanism'. One colony could try
> 'laissez-faire capitalism' but other colonies could try quite different
> things
> - for instance a 'gift economy' or even new kinds of socialism for those
> who still think it could be made to work. It's important to realize that
> transhumanist technologies are going to open up new political possibilities,
> which we cannot clearly see at this point.
You are talking in a way that is appropriate to a rich hothouse
environment like on earth. You haven't begun to grok what it
will take to tame a new world to human occupation.
>
> The purpose of the transhumanist Mars colonies is ultimately to set an
> example
> for the Earth. When the rest of the world sees that the new system works,
> THEN and only then will transhumanists have a chance to convince everyone
> else
> that their system is the right way to live.
>
Decades from now?
> Apart from politics there is another major reason why I believe that
> transhumanist Mars colonies will be a necessity. That reason is of course,
> technology. The promise of nano-tech, biotech and AI cannot be overstated,
> but nor can the dangers. An excellent paper by Nick Bostrom recently looked
> at 'Existential Threats' that could result in the extinction of humanity
> should these technologies be misused.
>
> The ideal way to vastly reduce these threats is to develop the s.
> technologies off world (namely on Mars). Should something go s.
> spectacularly wrong, then humanity would have a much greater of s.
> containing thing s.
> All this is pretty logical and basic to my way of thinking, so I'm a s.
> little puzzled as to why extropians do not devote more attention to s.
> promoting the colonization of Mar s.
>
Because it will be ever so much easier to colonize Mars or even
simply get to orbit *after* we develop a bit more technology
down here where we have the luxury of spare time, material,
energy and brains enough for such pursuits.
> Any way, to me it's more or less inevitable that things must happen this
> way.
> The transhumanist program will reach a certain point and then the Luddites
> and the political inertia of Earth-bound bureaucracy will block it. Further
> progress will require off-world colonies - and Mars is the only realistic
> place for the first ones. There will be lots of experimentation with
> different political systems and after several decades it will become clear
> which ones work and which ones don't. At the same time nano, bio and AI
> will
> be developing to their greatest heights (because they will be free of Earth
> bound regulation). Dangers and benefits will become clearer and any
> disasters
> will be confined to the small number of colonists. Eventually someone will
> build a true superhuman intelligence (true AI) and the Singularity will have
> come. Should something go wrong and the AI goes nuts it will be confined to
> the 'box' which is Mars.
>
Huh? No. This will not work. If it is a true SAI it will no
more be confined than the colonists are. Probably much less so.
Having no regs on dangerous technology simply will not occur
in underground warrens or under domes on an alien planet among
people who value their lives. They have no room for "oops".
After several decades you say? And what happens in the
meantime? In the meantime we all die and some future generation
perhaps gets ahead of the harsh Martian environment enough to
have the amount of time to blow smoke that we have. Gee, great
plan!
> In the end, if all goes well, a truly successful, integrated 'post-human'
> society will emerge on Mars, which can serve as a template for the people
> back
> home. And what will transhumanists do then? I quote you the ending of
> 'Atlas
> Shrugged' by Ayn Rand:
>
I am a great fan of Ayn Rand. But please spare us.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:23 MST