From: Sayke@aol.com
Date: Thu Nov 11 1999 - 03:19:00 MST
In a message dated 11/11/99 12:55:57 AM Pacific Standard Time,
bradbury@ilr.genebee.msu.su writes:
> It is worth commenting that I'm not sure that the "Grey Goo" scenario
> has had a serious examination by people qualified to judge its development
> timeline and/or possible defenses. Given the difficulty of engineering
> concrete disolving enzymes and the fact that even diamondoid slicers &
> dicers "wear", and the fact that whether there are enzymes or diamond
cutters,
> for extended operation, they do require energy supplies that can be cut
off,
> I wonder whether the "Grey Goo" nightmare is *really* that significant.
> It might be feasible, only for say an alien civilization to drop on
> a civilization totally unprepared to defend itself against such an
> attack, but might not ever work in an environment where you can see
> it coming and take precautions.
well, i guess that means i should back off my russian nuke sub obtainment
plans, and lay off my attempts to stockpile the necessary vodka, kailua, and
(powdered) milk... ;)
so would someone please comment (or point me to a relevant archive ref)
on the relative difficulties of moravic-style uploading versus the creation
of gray goo? was the recent lobster neuron replacement really much of a
milestone, as in, how far ahead of or behind 'schedule' was it? how are
things shaping up on this front? and how does the fact that soft nanotech
research is improving far faster then hard nanotech research enter into this?
eliezer and cohorts [just in case you have any, eris forbid ;) ], im sure
you can see where im heading with this...
sayke, v2.3.05
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:44 MST