Re: Goo prophylaxis (was: Hanson antiproliferation method?)

Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Thu, 28 Aug 1997 19:14:31 -0500

Mark Grant wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, Nicholas Bostrom wrote:
>
> > My intuitions are exactly the opposite. Your prediction seems to
> > presuppose that the first nanopower won't obtain world dominion, an
> > assumption I find very dubious.
>
> [From the extropians list of a parallel universe, 26/8/1937:
>
> "Your prediction seems to presuppose that the first nuclear power won't
> obtain world dominion, an assumption I find very dubious."
>
> [From the extropians list of a parallel universe, 26/8/1337]
>
> "Your prediction seems to presuppose that the first gunpowder power won't
> obtain world dominion, an assumption I find very dubious."

Nanotech is powerful enough to utterly subdue the enemy within days.
Gunpowder can't do that. Nuclear weapons could have done that, but we didn't.
Nanotech reproduces, which places it above nuclear weapons in that everyone
can have one. If only three or four powers had nanotech, the situation would
have stability comparable to our own, multiplied or divided by a factor
equivalent to the "first strike" possibility of success. If everyone (N>100)
has nanotech, the situation is the same as if everyone had a nuclear
*arsenal*. We'd be doomed. QED.

-- 
         sentience@pobox.com      Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
          http://tezcat.com/~eliezer/singularity.html
           http://tezcat.com/~eliezer/algernon.html
Disclaimer:  Unless otherwise specified, I'm not telling you
everything I think I know.