subject: (Fwd) FC: Bill Joy suggests limits to freedom and research posted: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:39:34 +0800
This one is forwarded because I know folks on this this are right
into nanotech, robotics and genetic engineering :-)
I did NOT forward because I agree. Indeed I think the article is a
bunch of crap, but it was well worth the read anyway. Mr Joy is an
accomplished professional, but I feel he needs to learn more about
nature and its lack of absolutes. His writing is very mechanical, an
attribute I ascribe to his computing background. He does not think
in blobs, he thinks in blocks of fixed dimensions. To me, this is
the source of his alarm, and he will relax once he reads more about
"complex systems", a term he uses incorrectly. Complex
systems, in scientific terms, are those formerly known as "chaotic
systems", based on chaos theory (now known as complex
systems theory). Self-sustaining, learning, adapting to the
environment. Live organisms, basically. He knows little of chaos
theory (despite claiming an introduction to the topic) -- if he knew
more, he would not have used the term incorrectly. This lack of
knowledge becomes obvious when he starts outlining the
consequences of a single escaped nano-replicator (grey goo
problem). I find it very unlikely that a single escaped nanon-
replicator will survive in the open environment. Nature will evolve
something that eats it. End Of Story. Mr Joy does not understand
this, which is a fundamental flaw in his paper. But, top article
nonetheless.
If he quits, I'll be more than happy to demonstrate what I would do
with the knowledge he shies from. He's been hanging out with
some bad eggs. He should go back to Berkeley, take some more
acid, and chill out. Yes, some people will fuck up and kill
themselves and some of their surroundings with some dumb
nanotech. But she'll be right mate, this planet hasn't lasted 5
billion years for nothing. I continue to be astounded at the
anthropocentricism shown by great minds. He thinks we can nuke
nature with one slip in a lab, shall we test it.
Stuart
------- Forwarded message follows -------
Date sent: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 20:40:09 -0500
To: [email protected]
From: Declan McCullagh <[email protected]>
Subject: FC: Bill Joy suggests limits to freedom and research
Send reply to: [email protected]
**********
>From: "Trei, Peter" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Bill Joy suggests limits to freedom and research.
>Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:20:27 -0500
>
>I'd like to suggest that people take a serious look at Bill Joy's
>"Why the future doesn't need us", the cover article
>in the current Wired magazine. It can be found online at
>http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy.html. >
>Bill (one of the Great Old Men of the Internet, with vi, BSD,
>Java, and Jini to his credit) it not a nut. He has reputation
>capital to burn. He's talking about the possible imminent end
>of the human species.
>
>Briefly, he argues that current advances in biotech,
>computers and robotics are creating such powerful
>instrumentalities that either we'll make machines smarter
>than ourselves, which will take over, or some nut will unleash
>a nanotech self-replicator or an engineered micro-organism
>to doom the human race.
>
>Bill suggests that perhaps we need to consider if there are
>technological areas where we should not venture, because
>of the potential danger of the knowledge.
>
>This article is important, not only for what it says, but also
>how people are going to use it. It is manna from heaven to
>those who would further centralize and tighten control over
>people, and will undoubtedly be cited by those who would
>restrict privacy and anonymity.
>
>This article is partially a dystopic response to Kurzweil's
>"In the Age of Spiritual Machines", a book which I found
>provocative, if flawed.
>
>Peter Trei
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology
To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- End of forwarded message -------
generated by msg2page 0.06 on Jul 21, 2006 at 19:05:12
search: