From: Michael Lorrey (mike@datamann.com)
Date: Thu Feb 01 2001 - 08:18:16 MST
Spike Jones wrote:
>
> > Michael Lorrey wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually, the Mars Direct project could be accomplished by private
> > > industry maybe not with Bill Gates wealth, but the wealth equivalent of
> > > Microsoft. We could certainly do it with a mere 20% of the national
> > > surplus of the coming decade, and leave a permanent presence.
> >
> > Samantha Atkins wrote: I agree. But this is a far cry from what was
> > proposed by denis, which
> > was to have Mars be a backup in case something happened to earth. The
> > Mars direct approach would take decades to build up that kind of
> > presence and civilization on Mars. - samantha
>
> Of course. What I am proposing is not to reproduce earth civilization
> on Mars. This is a long-after-nano kind of task. What I have in mind
> is much more modest: preserving an example of earth-based life in
> the event that Bill Joy is right: that we get nano and it gets away from
> us and slays everything on the planet.
If Bill Joy's concerns are justified (i.e. not in the dino-killer
asteroid strike to Tunguska Event range of probability) then I would
advocate that nano should only be tested OFF earth. On that basis,
colonizing the moon and mars in order to build nanotech development
infrastructure is of paramount importance and totally justifies the
investment. The potential benefits of nanotech are too great to not
develop it.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:05:31 MST