Alternatively the question becomes: "Is the guiding force of the
government sufficient to responsibly ensure human survival in the face
of rapidly advancing technology? If not, what is the solution?"
Brad.
> ----------
> From:
> Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com[SMTP:Dan@Clemmensen.ShireNet.com]
> Reply To: extropians@extropy.com
> Sent: Tuesday, 20 January 1998 2:39
> To: extropians@extropy.com
> Subject: Re: Modern Technology: Out of Control?
>
> Weslake, Brad BG wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > Why do you think the image of modern technology being 'out
> of
> > control' has such a strong appeal? In what ways does technology
> appear
> > difficult to control? For some of the problems you identify, explore
> > their implications for government policy-makers. Provide examples
> for
> > your arguments.
> >
> IMO, the appeal is based on reality: technology is out of control,
> in the sense that no person or group can comprehend all of
> technology. Peter the Great (?) managed to teach himself the
> basics of the technology (European) of his time: that was
> probably the last point in history that such a thing was
> possible for one man. Today, a well-educated and capable
> technologist cannot stay abreast of more than a small part
> of one field. Even fairly dedicated techno-junkies such as
> many on this list have trouble tracking most relevant
> advances at a shallow level. No wonder the general public
> is overwhelmed.
>
> IMO, technology is actually considerably less under control
> than most alarmists realize. Many futurists believe the
> civilization of 50 years hence will be completely
> incomprehensible from today's perspective. Some
> more radical futurists think this is true for the civilization
> of 15 years hence, or ten years hence.
>
> Another way to put it is to ask "if technology is under control,
> what is the nature of the control? Is this control sufficient to
> prevent a runaway exponential growth leading to computer-based
> superintelligence?"
>