From: marc_geddes (marc_geddes@yahoo.co.nz)
Date: Thu Jul 18 2002 - 00:06:52 MDT
[quote from: Samantha on 2002-07-13 at 02:27:46]
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.
The Mars Society has already established most of the organizational
structure
for private fund raising. They have even set up what is called 'The Ares
Fund', specially for private manned Mars missions.
It will take a while to raise the cash but with the right business plan it
can
be done. All it needs is a few thousand people prepared to invest 10% or so
of their yearly income and let the funds accumulate interest for a decade or
so. There should be enough funds to begin building the hardware for the
first
manned missions by 2010. First people to land on Mars by 2020. And the
Mars
colony established by 2030. Remember once the hardware is in place for the
first mission, all future missions will be far cheaper.
2030 is a fair way into the future but it's still within our lifetimes and
pre-Singularity. (Best current projections put the Singularity at 40 or 50
years into the future).
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.
Not if the world is in danger of falling apart around you! The Singularity
is
going to be unprecedented - there is no telling what will happen.
>
> 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.
If Nick Bostrom's paper on 'Existential threats' is to be believed, we are
now
approaching the point where the situation is critical. Can you imagine what
might happen if terrorists get hold of things like advanced nano or ai? -
9/11
will look like kid's stuff.
Something new is called for and it's called for fast! (i.e Pre-Singularity).
> 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.
It could be given sufficient time, but time is what we haven't got. A
completely new political system needs to be in place prior to the
Singularity
occurring. There is just barely time to set up a transhumanist colony on
Mars
prior to the onset of the Singularity. There will not be time to do this on
the Earth - social inertia is too strong. When the Singularity arrives it
will be total 'culture shock' .
> 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.
Good points! I'm not against religion as such, only fundamentalism.
> 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.
The situation is becoming critical. People need to change or people will
perish.
> 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).
True, but it's not the Christian fundamentalists that really scare me - it's
the Islamic ones (and there's plenty of those people in Europe). Remember
9/11? That's just a little taste. Can you imagine what would happen if
they
get their hands on things like advanced Bio, Nano-tech or AI?
> 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?
Yes. But personally I would feel much safer there than on Earth. ;)
> 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?
Yes, but we're pressed for time. As I've been saying, I really feel that a
Mars colony needs to be in place prior to the onset of the Singularity.
> 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?
I don't think we need postpone our dreams. We can continue promoting the
things we believe in here on Earth, whilst at the same time press for a Mars
colony. After all, even with the best planning I agree that none of us will
be leaving for Mars before 2020.
Even if the Mars colony proves un neccessary it is still a good insurance
policy to have. And in the really long run it's a good project to carry out
in any case.
> 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.
I envisage groups of 20 or people in glass house type enviroments. (Like
the
bio-sphere experients on Earth). There could be up to 50 of these built on
Mars between 2030 and 2050. (1000+ transhumanists).
> 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.
Harsh environments will produce iron men and iron women ;)
>
> 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?
Yup, but it's going to take a long time whether we remain Earth-bound or
not.
I envisage that between 2030 and 2050 the Mars colony will be flourishing.
My hope is that the Singularity will occur on Mars and that we can thus
ultimately control the course of events back on Earth. And if the
Singularity
occurs on Earth then the colony will be an insurance policy against any
disasters back on Earth.
> 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.
There's really the main argument. Are space colonies a neccessary part of
the
transhumanist program, or are they simply a by-product?
I think we should have an insurance policy. The technologies may never be
developed on Earth (due to techno-phobia), or, on the other hand, they may
end
up out-of-control (due for instance to terrorists using nano-tech to wipe us
out).
I feel is is prudent to have an 'exit strategy' and so we need to get
started
on Mars right now. I really think that a Mars colony needs to be in place
prior to any Singularity occurring.
> 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\".
Well... not 'no regs' , but 'minimal regs' . And if it's a true SAI , it
will
still be intially limited due to the great distance between Earth and Mars.
This should provide some warning time for the people back home.
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!
See above. For the next couple of decades I advocate preparing for Mars
whilst at the same time continuing work promoting our views and developing
technology on Earth. We won't have to make a choice as to whether to go
or stay until 2020, even with the bets of planning. And then even on Mars
we will be in continuous contact with Earth via an expanded version of the
internet.
> 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.
I think that an 'exit strategy' is not as silly as you think. It's just a
prudent insurance policy. (Read Nick Bostroms paper on Existential Threats
again and think of 9/11 and Islamic terrorists with advanced nano). All I'm
saying is that I think we need Mars colonies prior to the occurance of the
Singularity. (i.e prior to 2050)
---- This message was posted by marc_geddes to the Extropians 2002 board on ExI BBS. <http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=61;action=display;threadid=52429 >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:32 MST