> I have an incredibly simplistic view of the future: we either embrace
> technology, or we die. The reason is simple: population. There is no
> known non-technical way to stop the population from growing, so
> Yes, there are a great many plausable scenarios in which technlogical
> change has detremental effects, but it's the only game in town. Live
Points well made. To Steve's point, this is a good over arching
statement. But it doesn't have any depth.
Tech like all lead based pipes are a rather bad idea (but good for
population control).
Not all ideas are so clearly bad.
And some ideas have some subtly. Large Nuke based reactors clustered
together are a bad idea. Small passive cooled nuke reactors based in
local towns and neighborhoods are a great idea.
We can accept tech -- That's the first step!
The 2nd step is to find the best tech and the best approaches and to
find out the ideas that seem great (like lead pipes) but aren't once you
get additional knowledge (e.g., lead is a poison).
-- Harry S. Hawk habs@panix.com"Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority," [said] Justice John Paul Stevens