Slashdot Mirror
Top Physicist Advocates Scientific Self-Censorship
spamania writes "The San Francisco Chronicle is running this article about a new book by Britain's astronomer royal, Sir Martin Rees, that advocates restricting scientific research in certain fields in the interest of public safety. In "Our Final Hour", Rees lends a sober, respectable voice to the oft-irrational ranting about nanotech, biotech, and other fields."
Why not just outlaw reading? Make it punishable with a death penalty.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
It's not like a supernova makes a very practical weapon...
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Words to consider before this head-long rush into self-censorship:
In Germany I first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then I came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then I came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then I came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then I came for me - and by that time I was the only one left in the room.
I, for one, hope they continue all research. It'd be way cooler to die by earth-sucking black hole or bio-matter disintegrating nanobots than of a heart attack or something. There would be an interesting, selfish comfort to dying when everyone else is dying too... :)
chl
Being beaten to death by killer robots by far outweighs any plans I've had for my own death. Then again I work in a lab with "Warning: RADIATION" on the door, with my back to the rad hood and frequently handle EtBr and other substances classed as potentially dangerous mutagens so uhm... put on some gloves.
Science is often dangerous (trust me, I've spilled a few drops of 6M HCl on myself), but usually the benefits outweigh. Sure I might create a deadly form of highly virulent, incredibly resistant, pathogenic S. Cerevisiae, but the likelihood of science causing having truly dangerous consequences is rather low.
Dammit... I've gone and put actual content in here when all I'd wanted to do was talk about my desire to be bludgeoned by killer robots. Damn brain, I'm gonna stab you with a Q-tip!
It has also been suggested that Hindenberg was himself 'sabotaging' his own efforts.
Other historians have also suggested that his name may have been "Heisenberg".
Perhaps that is the origin of gamma ray bursts: civilizations turning their planets into 100 meter diameter spheres with really powerful particle accelerators.
Sure it's massively unlikely, but it would explain why we SETI hasn't heard anything yet.
Imagine if the first signal we decode is: "don't build a particle accelerator larger than 5 kilometers in diameter or you will destroy your whole world."
a war on terrorism? How can we end a war on a method?
Other historians have also suggested that his name may have been "Heisenberg".
There seems to be some, umm, what's the word,... uncertainty over the gentleman's name.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Q: So, what have you achieved this month, loyal peon?
A: Marvellous, wonderful things. But for the good of humanity, I destroyed all my research.
Wonder how long I could get away with that?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.