Planetary Defense [was Re: Major Public AI Backlash Inevitable.]

Robert J. Bradbury (
Wed, 11 Aug 1999 20:49:21 -0700 (PDT)

> CountZero <> wrote:

> I tend to see most of our technological goals as fairly inevitable,
> given no major disasters,

Yep, the key phrase is "given no major disasters".

> In that vein, how many have read the USAF's 2025 scenario report and
> does anyone know how seriously the portions of it that we would find
> most attractive are viewed?

For those who don't know, the URL for this is at:

Just reading the titles of the documents makes me uncomfortable. Of course the interesting thing from my (our?) perspective is that 2025 could well be the post nano-assembler era and therefore a time of risk with regard to grey-goo (when you would presumably want some of the capabilities they discuss -- updated via nanotech of course).

Most important from my perspective, is there careful consideration of planetary defense:

For those of you who don't know, the Air Force is currently way out in front in the effort to discover near-earth crossing objects. (See

One of the most "Extropian" projects I can imagine supporting is the projects to identify space-based hazards to the planet and the development of the means to neutralize them.