From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Thu Jul 17 2003 - 08:56:32 MDT
Anders Sandberg wrote,
> Interesting point. I think this is part of the truth (I see
> the average mood of the computer science students at the
> Institute every day), but it is also a hint that we might be
> better off without "fair weather extropians". There was a
> technological determinism-optimism of 90s transhumanism that
> I have come to think of as both naive and passivating. It is
> not dynamic optimism: it is passive optimism. If the
> singularity is coming and Wired is always right, what use is
> there of doing anything except cheerleading?
This is the most important point that I think a few people have been
complaining about. Some people have gotten so optimistic that they
become inactive. Some people have literally argued against a Pluto
mission, claiming that Pluto will be turned into computronium before we
get there. Some people have literally argued against cryonics saying we
will be immortal before we get old. Some people have literally argued
against saving for retirement say that that the singularity will upload
us before we retire. The sad truth is that many people are so confident
about the future that they won't lift a finger to do anything. It turns
into a faith-based religion where real work is worthless and just
sitting back and doing nothing is the wisest course of action.
People who complain about our slow progress, question whether things
will work, point out flaws in existing plans, etc., are the real heroes
of tomorrow. They are the engineers of the future. People who don't
know enough technology to see the flaws, or who are so optimistic that
they don't see any need to address the flaws, are the people who are
delaying progress. Dynamic Optimism was never intended to be a
faith-based position. We were supposed to be optimistic that everything
was possible so that we would continue working toward a solution while
others had long since given up. Optimism should be an excuse to work
harder for the future, not an excuse to sit back and do nothing.
> Dynamic optimism is about actually doing something
> constructive. Sure, the IT sector is not doing great. But
> then we better invent new killer apps or find ways of using
> the existing in better ways. With cheap programming labor
> many new projects can be implemented that were too expensive
> before. Cryonics doesn't work? Too bad, let's find another
> solution. People are not acknowledging Drexler in
> nanotechnology? Write papers that do. Investments went bad?
> Start over, a bit more cautiously.
> Biotech is under regulatory and luddite attack. So? Go out
> and defend it!
Excellent advice! I am seeing more and more people starting to question
our past irrational exuberance. I hope that this will lead to a new
stage of increased activity and action. Those who complain about
problems are not the enemy. It is those who see no problems who are the
enemy. The first stage in any technology or engineering project is to
identify the problem. Only those who are dissatisfied with our current
progress will do better in the future.
> I found Dr. Bainbridge's talk at TransVision 03 very constructive
> (http://www.transhumanism.com/articles_more.php?id=697_0_4_0_M
). We are getting challenged, now we better respond.
> Personally I am *more* optimistic about the transhuman future today
than
> I was just three years ago. We are finally starting to grow up.
Excellent article. It is so close to my recent rants that reading it
gives me déjà vu. I am glad that I am not the only one who feels like
we are either growing up or need to grow up.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISM, CISSP, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC Certified InfoSec Manager, Certified IS Security Pro, NSA-certified InfoSec Assessor, IBM-certified Security Consultant, SANS-cert GSEC <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 17 2003 - 09:08:13 MDT