From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Sun Apr 20 2003 - 10:47:15 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Samantha Atkins" <samantha@objectent.com>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2003 6:49 AM
Subject: Re: Tech Changes Battlefield
> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>
> > ### Yes, this is a very cool idea - technology progressing so fast that
> > conflict is reduced to demonstrations of one's technological prowess,
after
> > which everybody else gives up.
>
>
> So, technology makes right? The "conflict" does not have any
> more or less right parties, is or is not justified but is just a
> fact of nature effectively?
### No, the hypothesis goes the other way around - to have the ability to
develop better technology than others, you need to be generally nicer than
they are, at least in the long run.
-----------------------------------------
> Since only the good guys can keep up the
> > innovation cycle humming (or so we hope), the bad guys have no choice
but to
> > become technologically proficient (which necessitates becoming nice to
their
> > engineers, technicians, their families, the merchants selling them
stuff,
> > the families of the merchants, the restaurant owners where the merchants
> > meet...., the scientists' dogs....everybody), or else shut up and cower
> > before the latest laser.
>
> This does not all follow. Or did the Soviets not put something
> in orbit first and field and extraordinary army of excellent
> scientiests and engineers in the cold war? Did they or did they
> not acheive sufficient military technology to destroy the world
> just as we did?
>
### And the Nazis, too - but see what happened: In the protracted
technological competitive engagement the US won handily. You can in the
short run, 10 to 30 years, use violence and top-down command system to
squeeze a lot of performance out of your available infrastructure, the
universities, businessmen, trusting regular citizens. This is like steroids,
a big boost of power in the short run. But, you do it at the cost of
damaging the infrastructure. Universities become ossified, businessmen
scared, citizens lose trust. Soon, you need more and more steroids, until
things start really going bad - osteoporosis, myopathy, ulcers, diabetes,
acne, and finally, the dreaded steroid madness.
Goodness wins because goodness makes you strong, in the long run.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 20 2003 - 10:56:03 MDT