At 12:00 PM 5/14/2008, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: snip
>I agree. I think there technological fixes are possible that can >bring "less developed" (which I think is the current PC term for >what used to be called "third world" and "fourth world") countries >up to a par with developed countries Dr. Gregory Clark makes a case that's hard to refute that it's not possible to bring these areas of the world up to par at all, not without something like gene surgery. http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf >without the amount of pollution and waste and such which accompanied >the rise of the first people to get to that level. The Chinese are *NOT* a case in favor of this point. >No, I can't list them here now because I think many of them need to >be developed. I do think that like many other things (frex the >overworked examples of the Manhattan Project and putting a man on >the Moon) they are the kind of things which _can_ be developed if we >as humanity in general and the appropriate leaders (government, >business, religious and other charitable organizations, etc.) in >specific set the goal of raising everyone up to equality without >waste, including frex steps such as sharing new technology with >everyone rather than looking for the way to maximize profit from and >power over their customers. Obviously it will take a shift in the >mindset of many toward altruism rather than selfishness, but that >mindset shift is what we should be doing anyway as "members of a civilization." The singularity will do that. But it's not without danger. An AI with godlike powers could be tasked with reducing human misery or simply decide it was a good idea. The problem is, it might well chose to accomplish this mission by killing off the entire race. Or seducing them out of existence like the story in "The Clinic Seed-Africa." Keith Keith _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
