It has been stated:
<<The frequently included quibbles, rephrasings, and "I
disagree with the part where you say..." have amply shown up the remarks
about "lemmings" and "political correctness" as flamebait.
Thank you,
Jef Allbright,
Samantha Atkins,
Alex Blainey,
Damien Broderick,
Philip Chaston,
Hal Finney,
Amara Graps,
John Grigg,
Spike Jones,
Barbara Lamar,
Mike Linksvayer,
Lucylou98,
Max More,
G. P.,
Jacques Du Pasquier,
Mikko Rauhala,
Anders Sandberg,
Scerir,
Steve365,
Darin Sunley,
Loree Thomas,
Natasha Vita-More,
and Beat Weber,
for speaking up.
(Sorry if I missed anyone there.)
Gratefully yours,
Eliezer Yudkowsky.>>
Yes, affirmations of one's opinion are essential, not to mention pleasant. I
am not embracing the Taleban or Al Qeida or any Wahabbi apparatch-nik as my
little buddy(Mustapha's Isle?).
Also, so far, I still support the President's apparent attempt to collapse
fundamentalist, Islamic guerilla movements, that are violently anti-American.
I am also currently, content, to support the nation-state as a viable
element of modern life. Surely, with the advent of drexlerian nanotech mass
production, or uploading minds, this will change. Yet nothing in material
reality has occurred yet.
Assuredly, if and when a singularity happens (I am not sure it will be soon)
can we base the 'friendliness' of a purported Sysop, on behavior of certain,
crucial, people on this list? Would an uploaded or cerebrally-enhanced,
spudboy100, really be any wiser, kinder, or more effective then a
non-transformed one? I am not so sure.
If I or somebody else cannot be more adroit in dealing with others
un-transformed, how shall I be when my character flaws are thus enhanced?
Till that time, we must deal with the world based upon how it actually is,
and back-burner new constitutions for a new age, which has yet to arrive.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:31 MDT