From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Mon Sep 01 2003 - 20:56:47 MDT
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Matt Welland wrote:
[snip]
> Given that in my experience there are many humans that seem to be
> short sighted, selfish, self-centered, and uncaring my concern is that
> without mechanisms in place to prevent it, over time most of the resources
> available to us will be controlled by a powerful few. [snip]
This is to some extent part of my point. Due to "singularity"-like
effects the period where one has control over "most of the resources"
is extremely limited. One "claims" a Near Earth Asteroid or part of
Kuiper Belt or the Oort Cloud. Or one starts to dismantle planets
or the sun. Then the entire concept of "control of the much by
the few" goes away. (It is worth noting that "Orbital Development"
has billed NASA for parking space (of the NEAR satellite) on "its"
asteroid (Eros) and is taking the U.S. State Dept. to court making
the argument that the U.S. doesn't have jurisdiction over said asteroid
and could not deny it the right to bill NASA.) [1].
It is clear that humans have a built in survival instinct that leads
them to hoard resources -- but what is the point of this when the
availability of the resources becomes significantly greater than
the needs of individuals to consume them? Or put another way --
how does one "break" an instinct when it becomes dysfunctional?
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 21:07:58 MDT