"J. R. Molloy" wrote:
> > I quite agree that nuclear weapons are an easier problem than biological
> > or nanotech weapons. The orginal poster said that if "the consequences
> > failure" of nuclear weapons were the same as nanotech, we would all be
> > dead. Not so, it is the nature of the technology, not the possible
> > consequences, that determine the ease of control. I believe we are in
> > violent agreement.
> > steve
> By "the consequences of failure" one means to say that control has failed.
> Consequently, since we've failed to control nuclear weapons (Hiroshima,
> Nagasaki), identical levels of failure in regard to nanotech or biotech
> warfare would kill us all, since these latter technologies have such
> killing power.
I fail to see such killing power. Much ado about nothing. Biotech
warfare has been with us for centuries to no ill effect. The idea of
someone being smart enough to build a universal assembler and
concurrently being dumb enough to not build it with sufficient controls
is nonsensical. Purely Pollyanish Paranoia Posing preposterously as
proper public politics.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:16 MDT