Re: [nanotech] Re: nanomedicine...?
Not at all, all of us earned a PhD while PLAYING CHESS, thats way we are so dumb talking about teachnocults....got to go, I have to finish my game, while i fill out an article i am writing with bogus references
marilyn1mew <marilyn1mew@...> wrote:
i know he was joking. so was i, hehehe.
i'm not into religion or any other superstitions, but a technocult
might be fun - especially when we have the nano virtual reality
online. may i be a high priestess <-not a nun->?
y'all are probably all phd's (SOOOO kool) or close to it, so it is
easy for me to see that i'm way out gunned intellectually, but i bet i
can kick your butt in chess. i'm really good.
k, i'll be quiet.
--- In nanotech@y..., Ooo0001@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 4/9/2002 10:21:37 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> marilyn1mew@h... writes:
> > 24,000 years? there are several noted futurists who say the
> > 'singularity' will occur in 2035 and maybe as early as 2025. at that
> > point in time we would be come posthuman and be immortal and super
> > intelligent. are they that wrong?
> Pssst. He was joking--referring to solving the rest of the world's
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
- Derek writes:
> Sure, things could still go all to hell pretty quickly, but the factSo what is your source for this "fact"? It seems to me you can make a
> remains that it's less likely to occur now (certainly on a global
> scale) than it was during the height of the Cold War.
pretty good argument either way. And the current situation seems
extremely dangerous, both the immediate global crisis (primarily, but
not limited to, the Mideast) and the longer-term consequences of
abandoning arms control and international institutions of law and civil
> Risk isn't zero by any means, but if zero risk is what you insistI don't. But we ought to think about risk in terms of a product of
likelihood and magnitude. When it comes to a danger of the highest
magnitude, we should not tolerate any unnecessary risk.
> I'm no hawk, but it wasn't arms control and internationalNo, it was the internal process of decay of a moribund system and the
> security that brought down the Soviet Union.
demand from its people for change. However, I would credit arms control
and the willingness to stand down from aggressive impulses with our
avoidance of nuclear holocaust during the Cold War.
> discontinuity of singularity depends on perspective.No, cartoonish like Leonardo's designs for flying machines, like
> > I think this notion of a "seed AI" is kind of cartoonish to
> > begin with.
> Cartoonish, like flying machines, rockets to the moon, telephones you
> carry in your pocket, and sending text messages to thousands of people
> around the world ;-)
Tsiolkovsky's moon rockets, etc.
> If you're referring to the Middle East situation, it's a mess thatI'm not predicting it, but observing it's unacceptably high likelihood.
> could spread further, but it's a bit premature to predict global
> holocaust just yet.
If it were not "premature," there would be little point in doing so.