Re: Technology evolves, etc.

From: Eugene Leitl (eugene.leitl@lrz.uni-muenchen.de)
Date: Fri Nov 06 1998 - 11:26:21 MST


Jeff Davis writes:
> [environmental impact]

Intuitively, global environmental impact of having a goodly fraction
of Sahara paved with a low-albedo material should not be so very
dramatic (but we oughta model that, right). Locally, terrific upwinds,
yes. Even more dramatic temperature delta between day and night,
certainly. Some more heating up of large city cores due to
exported heat, of course. However, this will be more than compensated
by reductions of greenhouse gases, and a possibility to regreen,
say, Sahara in the shades below PV panels/desalinators -- global
warming? which global warming?

In any case does orbital PV microwaving power down to terrestrial
rectenna arrays appear preferable. Better highly localized EM smog
(remember Waldo?), than L.A. photosmog, imnsho.

> [global load levelling]

If at all, seasonally only. Notice that many of the areas you
mentioned are politically instable -- another big con against a
centralization.

> [market economics don't apply to self-replicators]

Uh, wrong. Unless you manage to supersede (uh, well, postpone) market
economics by a Grand Extinction Event with Gray Goo nanoscale
autoreplicators, macroscopic autoreplicators are bottlenecked
by energy, land, and neighbour good will. You can purchase and
autoreplicator-tile a major test site in 3rd world country, but
don't try this at home (do we have any extropians from 3rd world
countries???) . In a pinch, you'd get nuked. (Uh, I forgot:
distributed uranium extraction from non-ores like granite and
isotope enrichment in situ: grow your own).

You _could_ seed an asteroid/comet kernel, but, unless properly
claimed (legislation will catch up very soon once the possibility
of space development by autoreplicators has been demonstrated),
many would interprete this as space piracy. (You could, probably
successfully, try to outrun the expansion of lawniks into space by
sending your panspermia nuclei far enough so they constitute a local
power the expanding 'civilization' front has to reckon with).

> Joe Jenkins wrote:
>
> >Although I share much enthusiasm for self replicating machines, I am
> >also skeptical of the benefits of cheap centralized energy. I am

'too cheap too meter', eh? The only pluses of centralized power is
ease of administration and fuel efficiency. Of course if you make your
energy locally from fossils, you can couple thermals to power, which
is not feasible in large centralized power plants due to lossage (try
Moscow, Russia for a nice instance of a major energy bagbiter).
Administration is not a problem today, since the advent of automation
using digital electronics. The only problem is fuel monopoly, which
only applies to fossil, not solar. The only reason against going solar
in the Southern U.S. is 1) large initial installation cost 2) yearly
maintanance cost. Otoh, the resulting power is much cleaner (no
spikes, glitches et al., no smog), and you're independant from remote,
politically instable countries (let the boys stay home).

> [ubiquitous autoreplicators]

A factory churning out PV panels and copies of itself in the flat
desert is one matter, an autoreplicator running amok in Silicon Valley
is another entirely. Once you have to adapt to a complex environment,
the task complexity and thus also system's jumps way up. The
bottleneck in automation today is processing power, as our
sensomotorics seems to be more than adequate. Since processing
power equates to an advanced silicon foundry, complexity suddenly
jumps up.

> [cheap rooftop power kits from autorep]

With a fraction of the development costs to set up an autoreplicator
you can jolt the market into large enough numbers so that economy of
scale can kick in. Otoh, we certainly need R&D investment into
autorep, specifically into space-capable autorep. (I think NASA has
really goofed that one up).

> [component size is irrelevant. you will be assimilated]
 
I think the problem relates more to processivity/autorep grain size. Notice
that from a certain speed growth mechanism start do dominate: unless
capable of spawning remote nuclei (requiring a yet another feature:
efficient transport), the best you get is a circular/spherical growth
propagation wave (due to volume/surface ratio material transport
thru-cell near surface will peak high enough to bottleneck).
In any case, at the high end you'd be hard pressed out outrun your light cone ;)

> Nano ain't here yet. Cryonic reanimation ain't here yet
> (though suspension IS here, and SUCCESSFUL REANIMATION IS A NEAR
> CERTAINTY). Indefinitely perpetuated human lifespan ain't here yet

'NEAR CERTAINTY'? What makes you think that?

> (except by cryonic suspension, THE SUCCESS OF WHICH IS NEAR
> CERTAINTY). Human equivalent AI ain't here yet, nor SI, nor

Oh, sorry. 'NEAR CERTAINTY' appearing the second time in caps, now I am
absolutely convinced. What a killer argument. Ash on my head, what a
Doubting Thomas have I been.

> enhancements, nor uploading. But self-rep and the economic
> singularity that it will bring, marking the dawn of the transhuman
> era, is waiting to be built today,...this afternoon even.

The $20 Wal-Mart do-it-yourself tranhumanist kit... Now that's a GREAT idea.

ciao,
'gene



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:44 MST