Re: Genetic transition to posthumanism

Date: Mon Apr 30 2001 - 22:55:17 MDT

In a message dated 4/30/01 8:40:16 PM, writes:

>Ah, you really don't understand, do you? Nanotech is within a
>generation or just a hair more. Not in the far future.

Nanotech has done, to date, nothing. Nobody has even a simple nanomachine
going. Until somebody demonstrates machine-phase is even *possible*
it's way premature to expect it to even be practical, never mind superior
to liquid-phase "nanotech" - i.e., the biotech being belittled.

>Ditto for AI.

AI can't even do grammar checks yet. Moore's law may pull it out yet. Or may
not, depending on how efficiently Mother Nature used our neurons and how
high a frequency of gamma rays we can focus.

>Uploading may take another generation. If we don't start preparing
>ourselves as best we can for this rate and kinds of change we will be
>caught [more] dangerously flat-footed.

I'm all for planning ahead; but none of the advanced stuff we talk about is
imminent. AI is the only possibility for this generation. Nanotech is still
a speculation. Biotech may produce wonderful stuff soon; but we're not
about to improve brains yet because we don't know how, and we'll need
to be *very* sure before we do it. Even an AI "singularity" won't be a
singularity. We'll shift from a 20-year doubling time to a 18-month
doubling time, until Moore's law runs out. It'll be like the whole world
is a successful startup company for a few years to a few decades;
then it will be over.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 10:00:01 MDT