From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Apr 14 2002 - 12:27:07 MDT
> > I think that your confidence is primarily not based on objective factors
> And your evaluations are?
No, mine are not either. As I said clearly in a previous post, I think that
there is not available data to make rational judgments on such things.
> I believe the opposite, for the same reason. You still haven't
> addressed my
> example of computer viruses that I mentioned in an earlier
> posting. By your
> logic, there should be an increasing probability of some computer virus
> wiping out the Internet. But despite the fact that more people
> are writing
> them than ever before, and their spread is much easier than it was even 5
> years ago, the damage they do is proportionately less than it was
> beck when
> Robert Morris sent out his Internet worm. How do you explain that?
> I explain it by saying that increased technological sophistication allows
> for greater abilities to deal with threats. Yes, the power of individuals
> to do harm grows, but the power of the system as a whole to respond grows
> faster. AS long as knowledge about these threats - including nanotech,
> biotech, software etc. - is not bottled up, then I do not see why the same
> logic should not apply to these threats as it does to that of viruses.
I think our ability to rewrite computer systems to defend against threats
has increased FASTER than our ability to rewrite biological systems to
defend against threats is likely to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:38 MDT