Bill Joy's article "The Future Doesn't Need Us" implied to me the fearful
possibility that the future might need us after all, only to discover (to the
horror of all concerned) that we're not around anymore. Oh my! Dr. Jekyll
can't go back to being Mr. Hyde, because Mr. Hyde got transhumanized. So, if
we make a big mistake and create a technological nightmare future of dystopia
and amplified misery, we're (no, they're) up the proverbial creek with no
futuristic equivalent of a paddle. Well, I say the future _does_ need us,
because we create the future, and since what we do today determines how the
future plays out, we'd better get our technological act together immediately,
if not sooner.
Anyone who can read a newspaper knows that's not happening.
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, CYC, and ELIZA
Everything that can happen has already happened, not just once,
but an infinite number of times, and will continue to do so forever.
(Everything that can happen = more than anyone can imagine.)
We won't move into a better future until we debunk religiosity, the most
regressive force now operating in society.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christian Weisgerber" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 9:41 AM
Subject: GEEKS: Linus Torvalds on Bill Joy
> I'm currently reading Linus Torvalds' autobiography _Just for Fun_,
> where he offers this comment on the Bill Joy debate:
> [...] I distinctly remember thinking [Bill Joy] was probably
> the nicest and most interesting of high-profile people I had
> met in Silicon Valley.
> Flash forward three years. I pick up _Wired_ magazine only to
> encounter his horribly negative article about technology entitled
> "The Future Doesn't Need Us."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:54 MDT