I crossed the line with the "simply naive" comment and now I feel like a jackass and it's well deserved.
If you believe that I think technology isn't one of the most predominant factors, if not the most predominant factor, in solving or helping to solve "problems" (which we might want to define) then your mistaken. I agree hole heartedly. I have not been "persuaded that science is dangerous and not very important and taught not to trust it". In fact the exact opposite.
Your second comment. Your right and I'm backing down, should have used a valid example.
Your third and fourth comments are exactly what I wanted to hear. I just wonder how much influence a mostly free market "west" will have on this type of technology. You mention the Internet as something similar, and look what that's turned into (pornography and advertisements). Not to say that the internet hasn't help mankind in many ways, but it has also given criminals new avenues to explore.
The point is nanotech and AI will bring about some fantastic changes, but I don't believe it will be all good. As an example, which I'm sure you've argued before, consider what would happen if the life expectance of everyone on the planet was increased to 100 years. Could the planet sustain that? Do we take the attitude of "By the time it becomes a problem we will be able to fix it." That attitude drives me crazy from the small scale (office settings) to the large (government). What are your thoughts? Do we just proceed into the future without abandon or regulation?
This is perhaps the most foolish thing I've ever read. If I'm wrong tell me, but are you saying that AI and nanotech will solve all the worlds' problems? How many times have we heard that in the history of man (Medical advancements e.g. penicillin etc...). We could solve world hunger now if we so desired, we choose not to, that's just the reality of it. Call it selfish, or what ever you like but it's not technology that is going to "save us". If fact that kind of statement scare me a little. I'm really not sure what your point is but to state that technology will solve all our problems is pure and simply naive.
Slashdot Mirror
I crossed the line with the "simply naive" comment and now I feel like a jackass and it's well deserved. If you believe that I think technology isn't one of the most predominant factors, if not the most predominant factor, in solving or helping to solve "problems" (which we might want to define) then your mistaken. I agree hole heartedly. I have not been "persuaded that science is dangerous and not very important and taught not to trust it". In fact the exact opposite. Your second comment. Your right and I'm backing down, should have used a valid example. Your third and fourth comments are exactly what I wanted to hear. I just wonder how much influence a mostly free market "west" will have on this type of technology. You mention the Internet as something similar, and look what that's turned into (pornography and advertisements). Not to say that the internet hasn't help mankind in many ways, but it has also given criminals new avenues to explore. The point is nanotech and AI will bring about some fantastic changes, but I don't believe it will be all good. As an example, which I'm sure you've argued before, consider what would happen if the life expectance of everyone on the planet was increased to 100 years. Could the planet sustain that? Do we take the attitude of "By the time it becomes a problem we will be able to fix it." That attitude drives me crazy from the small scale (office settings) to the large (government). What are your thoughts? Do we just proceed into the future without abandon or regulation?
This is perhaps the most foolish thing I've ever read. If I'm wrong tell me, but are you saying that AI and nanotech will solve all the worlds' problems? How many times have we heard that in the history of man (Medical advancements e.g. penicillin etc...). We could solve world hunger now if we so desired, we choose not to, that's just the reality of it. Call it selfish, or what ever you like but it's not technology that is going to "save us". If fact that kind of statement scare me a little. I'm really not sure what your point is but to state that technology will solve all our problems is pure and simply naive.