From: Forrest Bishop (forrestb@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sat Jan 16 1999 - 13:29:22 MST
From: Anders Sandberg <asa@nada.kth.se>
> Date: 11 Jan 1999 13:25:31 +0100
> Subject: Re: Major Technologies
>
> "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com> writes:
>
> > Anders Sandberg wrote:
> > >
>
> > I explicitly said otherwise. I said that the naive people at Foresight
I would not presume to characterize the Foresight Institute and itsAssociates as
"naive".
> > will publish their breakthroughs and that someone else will try to
> > monopolize the technology totally. Does the US embargo prevent Saddam
> > from visiting Foresight's Web site?
Well, maybe. Check out:(Hotwired)
People all over the world are turning to the Net for the latest info
about what's going down in Iraq - everyone, that is, but the people of
Iraq, who have no Internet systems or services whatsoever.
http://go.wired.com/news/news/politics/story/16904.html/hf199851
> > The term "naive" is strong. I began using this term when, during a
> > debate on red goo vs. blue goo, I pointed out nobody had proposed any
> > sort of active shield that would stand up to nuclear weapons,
I've put out a few scattered bits and pieces on this topic over the past
few years. One defense is simply bulk: all the nukes in the world today
would barely make a dent in Mt. Everest (a relatively tiny structure), nor
are they of much effect against deep underground installations.
Because a nuke has minimum size limitations, it's ammenable to early
detection via 'Star Wars' (or 'Land Wars') sensing and response.
As for an all-out strike, consider this- radionucleotides are scarce relative
to Si, C, H, Pb, etc. Explosive construction can overwhelm.
Of course the best defense of all is vacuum- lots of it.
> > Fact is,
> > offensive technology is running far enough ahead of defensive technology
> > to blast civilization right now, fair or unfair, and I think the problem
> > will only get worse.
I don't agree at all. The efficacy of offensive and defensive measures
change place over time, historically. The current situation is temporary.
Even a simple strategy like change of address (e.g. Mars) will tip the
balance back.
> The important thing is to do a threat analysis, and try to see what
> countermeasures (including the 36th stratagem, running away)
Isn't this number 1 stategem? I've only lost one fight in my
entire life, when I slipped going around a corner.
Forrest
-- Forrest Bishop Manager, Interworld Productions, LLC Chairman, Institute of Atomic-Scale Engineering http://www.speakeasy.org/~forrestb Senior Associate Foresight Institute
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:02:51 MST