From: John K Clark (johnkc@well.com)
Date: Sat Oct 05 1996 - 11:24:05 MDT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Sat 05 Oct 1996 Damien Broderick <damien@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> Wrote:
>I have to say I regret the tone of rancor that seems to have
>crept into these public postings of late.
I regret the rancor too. I can strongly disagree with somebody and still be
quite found of them, but I'm only human (damn it). When somebody asks me to
tell them exactly what is it about Nanotechnology manufacturing that makes it
much easier to do than conventional manufacturing, and I take the time to
respond with 6 fundamental reasons, and it is dismissed with 4 words, then
I get mad.
Drexler has shown that Nanotechnology does not violate the laws of Physics or
Economics. I think Drexler has also shown, in a general sort of way, how to
do it, but there are a LOT of details, neither he nor anybody else has
provided a complete flow-chart to achieve Nanotechnology, that's asking too
much. If we could do that we'd be in the Singularity already.
I agree entirely with Drexler's statement "Any critic declaring this to be an
optimistic book hereby stands charged with having failed to read and
understand". Yes, nanotechnology will bring grave (and I do mean grave)
social problems. No, draconian authoritarian controls will not work because
although they may be draconian and authoritarian, they will not be able to
control the coming changes, and no, I don't know what will. I wish I did.
John K Clark johnkc@well.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQCzAgUBMlaUSX03wfSpid95AQE3SgTw4relJcy6gzX7wENxOHXV51kYMLBOwZIv
AtNH/OynIINTmW+2fgMMVoAApfHUsDSvGY9KGusq3IjQYGQNw1lJj+k4MsWNg4tY
vweZt5rO0fQm7e4YDxEd34wq99f9XBTGnvrJE2nO6R3iFlKRzHZEiHBsWi5NhoTG
GQ3vKMr0ur4ZnFFFE00El/r/H1syoCmAZtjJTu38viIxG3kxEi4=
=9rhg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:46 MST