From: Aaron McBride (amcbride@jps.net)
Date: Wed Jun 19 2002 - 09:47:42 MDT
At 07:45 AM 6/19/2002 -0700, you wrote:
>--- Aaron McBride <amcbride@jps.net> wrote:
> > If this is true, then how do I defend myself from a
> > nuclear bomb?  We've
> > had 50+ years of technology between the invention of
> > nukes and I still
> > don't have a Kill-o-Nuke.  I'm afraid Mr. Joy may be
> > right on this one,
> > even if he's wrong about the solution.  The future
> > is unknown - there may
> > be some weapons that have no defence.
>
>Eliezer's hypothesis still stands in that equal rates
>of technological advancement among aggressors tends to
>minimize actual harm from the same. The nuke scenario
>could serve as an almost perfect example of this, in
>that ICBM parity defined the Cold War (emphasis on
>'cold').
>
>I do not believe that an SDI-type nuclear defense
>shield can never be developed. How ridiculous that
>this has become the mantra of the dirty-dems in DC. It
>betrays a pathetic, not to mention insulting,
>pessimism about our abilities. What would they have
>said to their cult-hero, JFK, when he announced that
>Americans would walk on the moon by the end of the
>decade?
>
>In any case, the problem lies on the demand side.
>Should an ICBM threat from a "rogue" nation become a
>reality, that shield would go up pretty quickly (or
>the threat would be eliminated. Iraq?...)
>
>-Martin
Yes, "equal rates of technological advancement among aggressors tends to 
minimize actual harm from the same."  But that's not necessarily what we're 
worried about.  How about un-equal rates to technological advancement which 
can be expected as the rate of technological change increases. In the past 
group X may have been 3 months ahead of group Y, but with nearly equal 
advancement rates a year later group X may be 3.01 months ahead of group 2, 
no big deal.  What happens when one group can go from being 3 months ahead 
to 6 months ahead a year later?  I think you're right about the major 
problem being the demand for advanced weapons/defensive systems.  There's 
still the problem of lag time.  If one group is able to develop a doomsday 
technology and deploy it before any other group develops counter-measures 
then we're all in trouble.  ICBMs can be stopped with SDI, but SDI can't 
stop suitcase nukes.  It's the suitcase version of germ/nano-warfare that 
could set a human born singularity back by thousands of years.
-Aaron
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:39 MDT