Anders wrote:
> My view too - I love civilisation with its complex, intertwined and
> wonderous systems that make it possible for me to listen to Beethoven
> while communicating with similar minds halfway across the world, eat
> delicious fruits out of season and watch the snow settle outside my
> window while I'm warm and cozy. That is something well worth
> defending.
>
> Of course, a hypothetical future wearable and nanoassembler-equipped
> hunter-gatherer (wanderer-assembler?) might be able to have all the
> above without being tied to a single location, but it wouldn't change
> the fact that he or she would likely be part of such a civilisation
> network.
>
What a very cool vision! It's kind of plausible, too, if you buy into the
nano-santa stuff. After all, this talk about levels of tech and work
required to support person on a certain area of land is really about how
much tech & work you need to put it, to cope with a given level of
resources. The tech and work help you make more of less. Given a super duper
general assembler kit (probably built into your body), you don't really need
many raw resources to do very well indeed! It's questionable how much work
you'd need to do; not heaps, I'd think. That fits with the hunter-gatherer
idea. Original-affluence++, excellent.
We could see "people" (in the broadest sense) spread out amongst the stars
in what looks very much like nomadic hunter-gatherers spreading across new
continents. Hardly the galactic empires of the space operas.
Emlyn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:43 MDT