Adrian Tymes wrote:
>
> GBurch1@aol.com wrote:
> > In a message dated 6/23/00 9:02:17 AM Central Daylight Time, talon57@well.com
> > writes:
> >
> > > And check out www.greenstar.org
>
> As an engineer (of sorts): this looks like it would probably be
> feasable. It would best be done in areas where the powers that be are
> not actively oppressing the civilians (for instance, in most of the
> pockets of ex-USSR and North America they mentioned); as has been
> mentioned, any regime who is more interested in its own welfare than in
> the welfare of its citizens might just destroy Greenstar installations
> in order to to keep control, or (more likely) appropriate them for their
> expanded benefit at the expense of the people they were meant to serve.
Alas, I must agree with Adrian. Engineering rarely is the solution to
political problems. A Greenstar installation is just too much value
concentrated in too portable a form- I fear that without the patronage
of local powers, it would simply be stolen and dismantled. Corruption
and theft are the real enemy, not nature.
> It needs doing, true. But this will, at best, only indirectly support
> other goals that need tech that does not yet exist (for instance, life
> extension). If you're looking for a place to encourage non-extropians
> to invest, this is certainly a good one, but your own dollars may be
> better directed to more radical ventures that non-extropians would not
> support.
Yes- Greenstar has much broader appeal than core extropian interests.
Let us focus on these area with litle support, and let Sally Struthers &
friends push Greenstar.
-- Doug Jones Rocket Plumber, XCOR Aerospace http://www.xcor-aerospace.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:14:28 MDT