Re: Singularity or Holocaust?

Randall R Randall (
Thu, 26 Feb 1998 23:51:20 -0500

On Wed, 25 Feb 1998 22:52:49 -0800 Paul Hughes <> writes:
>I have pondered with great interest some of the recent postings on the
>and post-humanism. One of the passages that caught my eye was by den
>Otter posted
>to the list on Feb 21. It reads as follows:
>'Unless trasnhumanists get somehow organized the chances that any of
>us will make
>it past the singularity are close to zero; the powers that be will
>crush us like
>worms. Only (some of) the rich and powerful are going yo make it.'
>I have to say I can't argue with this - this seems liek a *very* real
>Does anybody see it differnetly? And if so, how and why have you come
>to a
>different set of conclusions?

Yep. The choice seems to lie with the first scientist (or, more
likely, group of scientists) who develops the single major
breakthrough (e.g. MNT?). If there are a series of equally
important advances, many of us are likely to be not too far
behind the most wealthy or powerful, so the only danger is
if one single advance is most important. I think that this is
the case, but that the people who develop it are no more
likely to be evil than any other random group of scientists.
Given an assembler, able to replicate in (say) an hour, for
the first generation, why would the researchers who
developed it be inclined to turn it over to the military, the
government, or even their bosses, since money and
most military power is suddenly pointless?

Wolfkin. | ICQ: 3043097
On a visible but distant shore a new image of man,
The shape of his own future, now in his own hands.
| Johnny Clegg

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]