From: Dan Clemmensen (Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com)
Date: Fri Jun 11 1999 - 17:03:52 MDT
Cynthia wrote:
>
> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
> > 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. 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.
>
> It may very well be possible that the average person will not be able to
> handle the enhancements necessary to become 'immortal'.
I was thinking in terms of a scenario in which augmentation leads to
massively increased intelligence that leads to innovation that
results in immortality. The same increased intelligence would
find ways to adapt the enhancements so that the average person
could handle them. This is a variant of the "singularity" argument.
If we get immortality without superintelligence, then power could
indeed concentrate in the immortals based on simple longevity, but
the time frame for that accrual would be one or two centuries. I just
don't see how superintelligence can be suppressed for that long.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:08 MST