M. E. Smith, <mesmith@rocketmail.com>, writes:
> That said, I'm surprised that I can't find any
> reaction to Bill Joy's feature article in the latest
> Wired magazine. I can't find it on-line yet, but the
> paper version has hit the racks. It's the cover story,
> "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us.
The article was mentioned over the weekend, but I think most of
us haven't had a chance to read it (yet).
> Much of what Joy says parallels what Drexler said
> about "engines of destruction". However, many on this
> list will disagree with much of the article, because
> Joy's attitude towards the end of humanity is that it
> is something that can and should be prevented.
There is a distinction here between the end of "humanity as we know it",
meaning people biologically and mentally similar to humans throughout
history, vs the end of any intelligences which bear a resemblance
to humans. Extropians would not support a world which turns into a
mindless grey goo or which kills off all human life via a biotech mistake.
It's not clear from your description whether Joy insists that humans
not only stay around, but that they remain unchanged.
I think this is one of the main areas where list members might disagree
with the general public, in that we accept the fact that humanity
may undergo considerable change over the next century, including the
possibility of becoming altogether nonbiological. Many people would say
that such an outcome is no better than having the human race wiped out
altogether.
Some extropians, like Moravec, go even further. He would say that it's
OK if no present day humans survive, if the human race is in effect
wiped out or at least superceded by robots and AIs of our creation.
These are, in his words, our Mind Children, and for them to succeed us
is no more tragic than for our biological children to do so.
Most people would not say that we should fight tooth and nail against
our children to prevent them from shoving us off the earth prematurely.
Yet they will say exactly that with regard to our mind children.
This sounds to me like mindless genetic programming talking, and needs
to be better justified if we are going to seriously oppose AI because
of its potentially superior survival abilities.
> He goes far; after
> outlining the central role he has played in the
> information revolution (for one thing, he invented the
> Unix editor vi)
I suppose it would be a cheap shot to make fun of vi here. After all,
I'm composing this message using it.
> Joy's attitude towards the end of humanity is one
> that, I believe, will be shared by an overwhelming
> majority of humanity when the issues become more
> widely-known. A powerful majority.
I will certainly look for the article. But I do think the distinction
above is important and can serve as a point of entry to get people
thinking beyond their knee jerk survival instincts.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:01 MDT