Re: freedom vs even distribution

From: den Otter (neosapient@geocities.com)
Date: Fri Jun 11 1999 - 07:12:21 MDT


----------
> From: Dan Clemmensen <Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com>

> I've read their entire "civilization", but not "Lessons of History."
> I think that the conclusion overlooks the likelihood of altruism
> among the potential immortals. If even one of the immortals has
> even the slightest amount of altruism, then the technology will
> be be disseminated to the populace as a whole.

Assuming that the other immortals allow it (there could be a codex
against proliferation of transhuman tech, much like the current one
against the proliferation of nuclear weapons). Violators could face
destruction, which is a horrible threat to a (potential) immortal. With
(near-)perfect surveillance being easy for posthumans, any "illegal"
development on earth could easily be nipped in the but.

> The argument against
> this assumes a zero-sum game in which a gain by the unwashed masses
> equates to a loss by an immortal. Information doesn't work this
> way.

Information is power, and by allowing millions of people to become
god-like too, you multiply the risk of something going wrong by
(approximately) the same amount. To the already fully autonomous
posthumans this might not seem like a very good idea; there's more
to lose than to gain.

No, posthuman altruism (if there is such a thing) would probably
result in (covert) uploading of "normal" humans, and letting
them "dream" their own version of a "perfect" future, while the
original uploads guard reality.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:07 MST