From: YakWaxx@aol.com
Date: Sun Aug 31 1997 - 14:45:38 MDT
Nicholas Bostrom <bostrom@mail.ndirect.co.uk> wrote:
> But suppose that you were right about this. Then the first power to
> get to the "singularity" (I sometimes wonder whether that term
> doesn't do more harm than good) would only need to be a *few seconds*
> ahead of the competition to become the ruler of the universe (at
> least in absence of aliens). I reality, of course, the leader would
> be months ahead, so this would automatically enable the leading power
> to eliminate all competition.
I think it's time we burned the term "singularity." If one power got to a
'singularity' and it was progressing at 1 month per second the other power is
likely to be progressing at .9999 months per second, the difference would be
minimal.
Many parts of this thread seem to revolve around the idea that one person
makes progress while the rest of the world stands still. The nanotech
'revolution' will be a combination of work from all corners of the world.
Defense and offense will progress together, minimising the threat of goo of
any colour.
--Wax
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:47 MST