Re: And What if Manhattan IS Nuked?

From: Brian Atkins (brian@posthuman.com)
Date: Tue Aug 20 2002 - 21:03:00 MDT


"Robert J. Bradbury" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Aug 2002, Brian Atkins wrote:
>
> > Usually it seems to take a long evolutionary period of mistakes before
> > we finally figure it out. This kind of evolutionary period however is
> > unacceptable when it comes to existential risks.
>
> Unless we constantly pay attention and are constantly evaluating the risks,
> e.g. the relative energy content of a high speed plane loaded with fuel
> compared with the fire resistance of our buildings, accidents will happen.
>
> The trend with nanotech would be in the right direction -- planes
> would get lighter and carry less fuel while buildings would get
> stronger and be more fire tolerant (support beams built out of
> sapphire rather than steel).
>

Robert, sometimes you seem unrealistically overoptimistic IMO.

(and this is coming from a guy who thinks we can build Friendly SIs :-)

At any rate, you aren't responding to my point. Why will nanotech not
also go through an evolutionary period where "accidents" can happen?
And if "accidents" do happen, what kind of magnitude do you expect might
occur?

-- 
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:18 MST