From: Max M (maxmcorp@inet.uni-c.dk)
Date: Fri Dec 27 1996 - 13:31:23 MST
> From: Anders Sandberg
> That is an interesting problem. If we assume that growth currently is
> technological growth, then a small elite *may* be able to continue it
> anyway!
Yes, but i talked about a "to small" elite. Where the border is for a too
small elite i don't know.
> Today we are seeing how a
> relatively small group of people are able to do the industrial production
> needed to sustain society. It might be possible that in the future a
> small "elite" is enough to sustain technological growth (one might even
> argue that this has always been true).
Again it's a question about exponential growth. If the doubling rate
becomes to fast, it will be very easy to end up several generations behind.
If we are close to a Singularity it would be very easy to be left a LOT of
generations behind. The more likely it will be that a techno elite will
develop. I don't mind that elites develop. I'm just concerned that they
becomes to small powerfull and rich, and leave the masses without means.
The society didn't become truly rich before the masses became rich. A good
example is hospitals/medical care that couldn't have been developed to the
current level if there wasn't a lot of money around. So it's better to be
poor today than it was to be rich a few hundred years ago. (At least in
Denmark where we have free medical care.)
But then again you may be right that a small elite is enough if it is
powerfull enough.
> I agree with this, but I don't think it will prevent the gap from
forming.
SNIP. The only way to deal
> with them is to find ways of reversign their learned helplessness.
Yes but the only "teacher" that can follow the exponential growth of
technology is technology itself.
MAX M Rasmussen
New Media Director
Private: maxmcorp@inet.uni-c.dk
http://inet.uni-c.dk/~maxmcorp
Work: maxm@novavision.dk
http://www.novavision.dk/
This is my way cool signature message!!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:56 MST