but the mere thought of them becoming real convinces me that a governing body is needed, the sooner the better.
More important than ineffectual government regulations on nanotech, will be developing an artificial immune system for the planet, the sooner the better. Every nook and cranny filled to the brim with smart "good guys", assuming the good guys get there first.
Even worse, in the case of GM foods, would it really hurt the fish farmers if natural salmon were to become extinct?
Hello? Who needs Fish farmers -- or any kind of farmer for that matter -- in a post-nanotech Economy? All you'd need is the "molecular blueprint" for just one nice salmon specimen to instruct your "desktop manufacturing" assembler to copy. Raw, recycled, feedstock molecules in; Tasty salmon out.
Of course, keeping ecosystems alive even when not necessary for our survival anymore is still a good thing if only for aethestic reasons. We might not need nature when we're able to do every job it does, but most of us would certainly want the natural emergent beauty around. What's an Alaskan river worth without being able to gawk at bears fishing for salmon with their claws?
This water strider story was posted two weeks ago, but because the way it was worded this time, the focus of the posts will probably be on robots (and dupe flaming) rather than the Christian Science Monitor being remarkably unbiased.:)
"First, there was the ground-breaking movie, "AI", then came 2005's earth-shattering blockbuster, "Nanotech: Napster9.0 Kills Trade", and a year later was the shocking "Transhuman Imperative". And now, coming soon to a theater near you... "Singularity: Our Future History".":)
Heh. For a lot of people movies are the closest thing to a science education they get.
Trek had it the worst -- technology that completely invalidated a money economy, but with plots driven by greed (Ferengis).
That always got me too. They had the ability to convert between energy and matter and yet the Ferengi obsessed over common objects that really had no value. Trek's Latinum should be worthless.
This is in contrast to the "simple" molecular nanotechnology that we'll have soon, where we're merely manipulating the atoms that already exist -- so elemental gold (Au) would still be scarce (but mining would be automated).
After 30 years, the telescope will be on the opposite side of the sun, so even if it was still working, you would need other sattelites to relay the signal.
The odds of us not launching relay sats in a similar solar orbit in the next 30 years is very low, so we'll know if it's still working when behind the sun if we're still here and still interested in antiques.
You BBC-watching commie! I'm going to make a quick call to the Terrorist Information Awareness hotline to report your anti-American activity, then I'm going right back to my comfy couch to watch more patriotic FoxNews... hey did you hear about Jessica Lynch? Such a heartwarming story. Go USA!!!
I've never been interested in ripping off Douglas Adams, or his family, by downloading mp3s
Why the fuck does his family deserve your money? So they can sit on their asses and collect a check, rather than creating their own work to promote the progress?
If you set cynicism aside for a second, it doesn't take too much effort to imagine a better future where the would-be Intellectual Property lords are defeated by public and private funding of new works. Rather than perpetually paying rent for artificially scarce content, people would instead pay organizations (like the BBC) and individuals for what's actually scarce: the creation of new content.
The only question is whether this labor enriches society as a whole, or whether a significant part of that labor extracts wealth from society for the benefit of Microsoft's shareholders.
So, it's either "communism", or capitalism through artificial scarcity?:)
I was actually happy for China (as a non-asian American) when I heard about their plans for a Dragon Chip + RedFlag Linux + WPS Office transition. Rather than draining money offshore into MSFT and INTC/AMD vaults, their efforts will end up benefiting everyone inside and outside their borders. Of course it'll hurt the mighty superpower in the short-run to not be the "IP" blackhole of the world, but in the long run everyone wins. (protectionism is shortsighted).
Surely you wouldn't restrict the use of such a device by silly laws just to make money that would be useless since you could make anything you needed anyway.
The thing of it is -- is that even in an economy of abundance with free digital reproduction (which we have now) and near-free material reproduction (which is the "other side of the couin" that we'll have soon), there will always be those would want to restrict this freedom in order to secure disproportionate power for themselves. It's not about logic.
It's in our genes to be greedy -- some more than others. Without genetic engineering it would take a loooong time for people to adapt a world with very little scarcity.
Identical twins seperated at birth still look almost identical even after decades of varying life experiences. So, taking someone's DNA and virtually aging it X years in a simulated environment would be close enough.
(Ever notice how reporters and police chiefs often have those permanently furrowed eyebrow muscles that just scream "I'm a serious mofo!"?)
How is that any less convenient than going to the local rental store (and rental for about $3-5 is not completely unreasonable).
It's a different kind of convenience. It's akin to a Tivo where it's always just caching stuff you might to watch; or it's like a netflix queue without the post office hassle.
And by the way, "I heard from a friend" that it only takes 6 to 24 hours -- not 3-5 days-- to download a 4GB+ bit-for-bit DVD-R rip from certain BitTorrent sites.
Slashdot Mirror
Froogle isn't anywhere near as good as addall.com for books, or pricegrabber.com & pricewatch.com for tech.
--
More important than ineffectual government regulations on nanotech, will be developing an artificial immune system for the planet, the sooner the better. Every nook and cranny filled to the brim with smart "good guys", assuming the good guys get there first.
--
Hello? Who needs Fish farmers -- or any kind of farmer for that matter -- in a post-nanotech Economy? All you'd need is the "molecular blueprint" for just one nice salmon specimen to instruct your "desktop manufacturing" assembler to copy. Raw, recycled, feedstock molecules in; Tasty salmon out.
Of course, keeping ecosystems alive even when not necessary for our survival anymore is still a good thing if only for aethestic reasons. We might not need nature when we're able to do every job it does, but most of us would certainly want the natural emergent beauty around. What's an Alaskan river worth without being able to gawk at bears fishing for salmon with their claws?
--
Sure it does; robots and AI go together like ... chaw-gee and poe-gee.
How would you teach a striderbot to stride? Top-down minksy style? Or bottom-up adaptive genetic-alg style?
--
Just the interesting ones. :)
You can skip the SCO-soap-opera updates and other fluff, but make sure you keep up to date with the ROBOTS, man, or they'll take over!
--
--
--
Heh. For a lot of people movies are the closest thing to a science education they get.
--
Well, in general, the more intelligent you are the less violient you tend to be. Violence serves primitive organisms well when resources are scarce.
--
That always got me too. They had the ability to convert between energy and matter and yet the Ferengi obsessed over common objects that really had no value. Trek's Latinum should be worthless.
This is in contrast to the "simple" molecular nanotechnology that we'll have soon, where we're merely manipulating the atoms that already exist -- so elemental gold (Au) would still be scarce (but mining would be automated).
The odds of us not launching relay sats in a similar solar orbit in the next 30 years is very low, so we'll know if it's still working when behind the sun if we're still here and still interested in antiques.
--
If you want to understand, just follow these three easy steps!:
(-1 Flamebait)
--
Why the fuck does his family deserve your money? So they can sit on their asses and collect a check, rather than creating their own work to promote the progress?
--
But enclosing the commons is soooo much more profitable. :)
--
If you set cynicism aside for a second, it doesn't take too much effort to imagine a better future where the would-be Intellectual Property lords are defeated by public and private funding of new works. Rather than perpetually paying rent for artificially scarce content, people would instead pay organizations (like the BBC) and individuals for what's actually scarce: the creation of new content.
--
Who watches ALL of anything?
Sturgeon's Law reduces the amount of viewing material to ~10%. Add in some collabortive filtering and you get even closer to the cream of the crop.
--
And I bet you'd have no problem consuming the grapes that've been squished into wine the traditional way -- between the sweaty toes of white laborers.
That was the lamest copout; are you really such a germ freak? I hear Farmers Markets are cesspools too!
--
So, it's either "communism", or capitalism through artificial scarcity? :)
I was actually happy for China (as a non-asian American) when I heard about their plans for a Dragon Chip + RedFlag Linux + WPS Office transition. Rather than draining money offshore into MSFT and INTC/AMD vaults, their efforts will end up benefiting everyone inside and outside their borders. Of course it'll hurt the mighty superpower in the short-run to not be the "IP" blackhole of the world, but in the long run everyone wins. (protectionism is shortsighted).
--
(And I agree, btw. I've learned to love that slight pang of hunger rather being a slave to it.)
--
The thing of it is -- is that even in an economy of abundance with free digital reproduction (which we have now) and near-free material reproduction (which is the "other side of the couin" that we'll have soon), there will always be those would want to restrict this freedom in order to secure disproportionate power for themselves. It's not about logic.
It's in our genes to be greedy -- some more than others. Without genetic engineering it would take a loooong time for people to adapt a world with very little scarcity.
--
"How unprofessional! You'll never work in this town again!"
--
(Ever notice how reporters and police chiefs often have those permanently furrowed eyebrow muscles that just scream "I'm a serious mofo!"?)
--
It's a different kind of convenience. It's akin to a Tivo where it's always just caching stuff you might to watch; or it's like a netflix queue without the post office hassle.
And by the way, "I heard from a friend" that it only takes 6 to 24 hours -- not 3-5 days-- to download a 4GB+ bit-for-bit DVD-R rip from certain BitTorrent sites.
--
There are places that rent movies, you know.
You just ignored his argument, you know.
--