> Geoff Smith wrote:
>
> Is it paranoia to think that the universe will only become more
> Darwinian after the singularity?
>
>
> Rick Knight responds:
>
> Perhaps a more pertinent question is are you devoting a single
> synaptic flash of energy towards this manufactured notion? Pardon me
> but, unless you're being tongue-in-cheek (and there is no evidence in
> your post to that effect), what could be the possible relevence of
> such a question? It sure beats agoraphobia for unreasonable
> disorienting fears!
I'm sorry if my question is more provocative than it is substantial, but
I'm afraid my inadequate synapses cannot fire up a connection between my
question and agoraphobia! "Paranoia" was an unfortunate and hasty word
choice. What I am really saying is that I am *concerned* for my security
in the future. How could anyone seeking indefinite lifespan not be
concerned?
It is not that I think anarchy and natural selection are in
themselves bad things, but a high selection gradient can be a little
unsettling, especially for a person of lesser synaptic integrity such as
myself. What would cause a high selection gradient? When/if we run low
on matter. When the very building blocks of our existence(unless you
believe in a soul) are in scarce supply.
The only immediate solution I can see to this problem is strategic
alliances. I won't eat your galaxy brain if you don't eat mine. But what
means to we have to study and prepare ourselves for these alliances? As
someone in another thread pointed out, game theory does not apply to
post-singularity entities. What can we do for security in a future of
uncertainty?
geoff.