Re: Frustration with politics explained

Dan Clemmensen (
Mon, 13 Oct 1997 22:05:55 -0400

Geoff Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Oct 1997, Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> > I didn't say I liked everything about the current system. I believe
> > that we should be using the current unprecedented prosperity to
> > raise taxes and pay off the insanely high debt (two thirds of which
> > was incurred during the Reagan/Bush years) to which you refer,
> > but I don't think this list is the appropriate forum. By "pretty well"
> > I mean by comparison to other eras. If we can just keep the system
> > alive for a couple of decades at most, we can break through to
> > a successor economy base on superintelligence and nearly unlimited
> > material wealth.
> Sounds pretty Utopian to me. How do you know that an oppressive
> government in some form will not exist post-singularity? We could
> probably maintain an anarchy now, but we don't. How can you be so sure
> this is going to change? Are superintelligences by nature libertarian?
> IMO, that would be an arrogant assumption on the part of
> anarcho-capitalists/libertarians.
I have no clue as to the politics of the SI.
> Now, I'm not claiming I can predict what post-singularity will be like
> (which is obviously futile) On the contrary, I am trying to show that we
> cannot rule out *any* possibility. The only preparation for an uncertain
> future is in the attempt to create the future. Creating the future
> involves enacting change in the present. If we don't start now, things
> might get ugly. Betting the problems of politics will be solved by the
> singularity is not a risk I'm willing to take.
The singularity may very well be catastrophic, rendering all current
politics moot. It may result in any of an effectively uncountable
different horrific outcomes, gray being one of the more comprehensible.
If you have a plan for steering the event toward any particular outcome,
I'd be happy to hear it. I just don't think that radical changes to
the existing economic/political system are relevant.

Please remember, I advocate actively attempting to advance the
by continuing technological advance. This has the advantage that if
I'm wrong and there is no immediate singularity, we still get the
advantage of the advance. This is one reason I continue to go to
work every day and attempt to forward the design of new and better
integrated switching equipment and enhanced heterogeneous routing
algorithms, instead of retiring or working in marketin g.