From: Ken Meyering (ken@define.com)
Date: Sat Nov 07 1998 - 07:19:06 MST
Dan Fabulich <daniel.fabulich@yale.edu>:
> So, let me get this straight: if we don't switch to an authoritarian gov't
> that literally opiates the masses (or barbiturates, or
> crystal-methamphetimates the masses) and organizes everything from the top
> down, people are going to to get smart enough to build horrible weapons,
> and then people are gonna USE those weapons and blow us all up.
Not all, just the memeset carriers who insist on paying taxes and are
unable to be reprogrammed into enjoying freedom and liberty. Mr.
Veteran refuses to give up HIS (Host Indentification Syndrome) and
cannot stand the thought of his HAM Radio frequencies being used by
Libertarian digital microcellular. He falls asleep and wakes up in a
VR simulation. His 4x4 and Gun Collection get melted.
> their incentives. And ethically? Well, I happen to be a utilitarian/
> libertarian. Maybe I won't even bother to open this can of worms here.
Ethics? It's unethical to rearrange the atoms in coffee beans to
make expresso. Unfair to the poor weak chemical bonds that insist on
remaining in the bean state. Fried chicken? Steak? Pork Chops?
> If you're right about your predictions, (and you'd have a hard time
> convincing me of this in the first place,) then I don't think a top-down
> economy is going to fix things. You see, in a top-down hierarchy, those
Agreed. But to dismantle the top down hierarchy in a nonviolent way,
you need to work from the top down. Kind of like a dissolution of
big brother starting at the top. The King says "servant, YOU WILL be
free now, but first tell your servants to pass the message on down
the hierarchy".
> Maybe not. Either way, the total obliteration of humankind would be
> inevitable. The longevity we transhumanists are striving for would be
> utterly pointless, and we'd all die.
Not necessarily total oblivion, just replacing evolution with
designed outlasting of human form. Why is it that anthropologists
have such a hard time tracing human evolution back on the tree of
life? Maybe we get to a point where our intelligence outgrows our
natural forms, then we clean up the mess, upload to nano-scale
distribute forms watching vicariously through the next evolutionary
outgrowth. Remove all evidence of technology, then watch through the
eyes of squirrels are monkeys, waiting to see who gets nanotechnology
next. Then, right before that species gets nano, we intervene,
upload, and eliminate all evidence of that species' existence.
(Leaving small traces and clues in the literature and mythologies).
> To sum up:
> If you're right but we don't listen to you, we die.
Correct.
> If you're right and we listen to you, we die.
Incorrect. You get to reach nanotechnology, and enjoy interplanetary
travel and immortality. You get to join "The Watchers" and patiently
sculp the evolution of the next species.
> If you're wrong and we don't listen to you, life is (relatively) good.
Well, maybe a compromise: we could make an industry of swapping the
gasoline burning engines with non-polluting engines, then retrofit
the cars with autopilot systems that operate when these heavy steel
vehicles are operating in proximity of lightweight hybrid
flywheel/electric motor driverless shuttles. We can't have heavy
human controlled cars sharing the roads with lightweight electric
cars. It's understandable how people are attached to the feeling of
control that a steering wheel, break pedal, and accelerator pedal
produces. However, human control can't be permitted on automated
shuttle based transportation systems. Rather than retrofit, it's
probably easier to scrap the human controlled gasoline burning
vehicles, then replace them with electric cars.
For those who are so attached to controlling their cars that they
won't go free without a fight, we can bribe them with hydrogen or
alcohol burning systems that have both autopilot and human control
modes. Then they can stock up on water or alcohol when they feel
like they might need to "head for the hills". ;)
> If you're wrong but we listen to you anyway, life sucks a lot.
Only if you listen to *me* only. There are plenty of people out
there to listen to in addition to me.
> Transhumanists have an interesting take on these "end of the world"
> scenarios, no?
Yeah.
> -GIVE ME IMMORTALITY OR GIVE ME DEATH-
What's the difference? You sleep don't you?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:44 MST