On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Steve Smith <sasm...@swcp.com> wrote:
> All this just leads me back to the Dyson Sphere > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere>. I wonder which faction > (Conservative, Progressive, Green or Libertarian at the moment) are most > likely to lead us to that point (ignoring the much higher likelihood that 2 > or 3 of the 4 will likely lead us off a cliff or into a bridge-abutment > first? > It seems as if the conservatives would find it most appealing on the face > of it, perfect and complete harvesting of all resources... sort of a > solar-system scale plantation (think Niven's Ringworld). > For similar but different in spirit, perhaps, the progressives would > approve of maximizing the delivery of natural resources to all humans > equally... greatest good for most in some sense. > Greens, you would think, would be totally opposed, the epitome of > destroying the "natural order". > LIbertarians probably assume that this is where we will end up on our own, > totally optimizing resource utilization through uber-free markets? > Assuming the original formulation of the Dyson sphere as a network of independent statites, I think the greens would be on board more than you expect. For any conceivable energy usage for the near future, we would nowhere near as many statites as it would take to significantly reduce the amount of solar energy that gets past them. Of course, the greens are a lot less unified than they would probably (need to) be if they were the dominant party, so there is room for difference of opinion. Are you talking about a neon green, or more of a kelly or olive? -Arlo James Barnes
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
