Cave Capitalist Part III: Neanderthal Alliance
Howard Lovy
Cave Capitalist Part III: Neanderthal Alliance
From: Three-Squeaks
Neatherthal Alliance
To: Two-Grunts & One-Cluck
Dear Mr. One-Cluck,
Thank you for your request to join the Neanderthal Alliance. We here in
the superior side of the species have been following, with great
amusement, your attempts at cave capital and public funding for your
so-called "Wheel" and "Fire" projects. And while we are convinced that
homo erectus (tee-hee, we still snort with great humor when we hear
those words) is destined for the dirt pile of history, we cannot help
but agree with our upright cousins that what you are pursuing is nothing
short of an elaborate fantasy.
http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_nanobot_archive.html#107897963619755430
John Larkin
Right on! You tell 'em, Howard! There were, after all, dullards who
scoffed at nuclear-powered cars, bubble memory, cold fusion, plastic
houses, and induction-heated dinner plates, and look where it got
them.
I guess the nicest thing about being a Futurist is that the Future
always stays reliably in, umm, the future.
John
Howard Lovy
Ahhh, yes, John. And take a look at how we're all living in a Jetsons
world now, too! Yes, very good point.
However, first, I'm not now and never will be (I predict) a futurist.
I'm a journalist, which means I try to illuminate the present. I
sometimes use my Cave Capitalist character (which appears to be growing
in popularity, much to my surprise) to satirize a current event or a
real ... um ... character making nano news.
Who's wrong? Who's right? Is molecular manufacturing physically
possible? I have no idea. However, its advocates deserve a place in the
ever-widening political, ethical and industrial disciplines defined as
"nanotechnology" just as much as much as the stock prospectors,
hucksters and public relations specialists.
A journalist like me is no more or less qualified to make that call as
are marketing specialists or those who hold doctorates in 17th century
British literature.
Well, one thing about the Internet. I'm assuming it's going to be some
sort of "permanent record." So, my great-great-great-great
grandchildren, God willing, might unearth this stuff from some
archaeological information dig and laugh their a..ess off at what a
Neanderthal their ancestor was.
Howard
http://nanobot.blogspot.com
John Larkin
On 14 Mar 2004 19:37:27 GMT, Howard Lovy <hl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Ahhh, yes, John. And take a look at how we're all living in a Jetsons
>world now, too! Yes, very good point.
>
>However, first, I'm not now and never will be (I predict) a futurist.
>I'm a journalist, which means I try to illuminate the present. I
>sometimes use my Cave Capitalist character (which appears to be growing
>in popularity, much to my surprise) to satirize a current event or a
>real ... um ... character making nano news.
>
>Who's wrong? Who's right? Is molecular manufacturing physically
>possible? I have no idea. However, its advocates deserve a place in the
>ever-widening political, ethical and industrial disciplines defined as
>"nanotechnology" just as much as much as the stock prospectors,
>hucksters and public relations specialists.
>
>A journalist like me is no more or less qualified to make that call as
>are marketing specialists or those who hold doctorates in 17th century
>British literature.
>
>Well, one thing about the Internet. I'm assuming it's going to be some
>sort of "permanent record." So, my great-great-great-great
>grandchildren, God willing, might unearth this stuff from some
>archaeological information dig and laugh their a..ess off at what a
>Neanderthal their ancestor was.
>
>Howard
>http://nanobot.blogspot.com
>
>
One of the things that is interesting to me about nanotechnology (but,
understand, I am easily amused) is the huge amount of fantastic
predicted applications as compared to the actual volume of working
concepts. If you look back on past technological predictions, the
overwhelming majority were wrong, simple because the real
technological revelations - transistors, home computers, the Internet,
gene manipulation - snuck up on everybody out of the blue. Even the
old science fiction novels still had their heroes dictating letters to
their dedicated stenographers, or wandering about the surface of a
planet, lost.
Predicting the future is like predicting the weather. Short-term
extrapolation of current trends works pretty well, but long-term
predictions are as bad as chance, if not worse.
I suspect that nano-scale manipulation of matter will eventually
happen in ways that nobody now suspects. Sounds like we agree on that.
My concern is that the hype will burn out the enthusiasm (and the
funding!) before all this sorts out.
John
Anton Vredegoor
John Larkin <jjla...@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:
[snip some good stuff about science fiction I mostly agree with]
>I suspect that nano-scale manipulation of matter will eventually
>happen in ways that nobody now suspects. Sounds like we agree on that.
>My concern is that the hype will burn out the enthusiasm (and the
>funding!) before all this sorts out.
Lets not forget that every idea has to be checked out first and there
is no way yet of knowing beforehand which ones will work out. So there
is definitely a reason to keep an open mind.
What disturbs me in this thread is that Neanderthals were actually one
of natures great successes, equal to us but different. There is no
reason to assume that a species that got extinct only very recently
and that coexisted with us for many millennia is somehow inferior.
Quite to the contrary, since they had a different but equally
effective brain there must have been some areas in which they were
superior to us.
One theory is that they had specialized in the part of the brain that
is in the back and side of the skull and that contains the associative
cortex, while current humans are relatively more specialized in the
prefrontal cortex, which is assumed to be involved in making plans and
in formal reasoning. Since formal reasoning is what computers do best
-even better than humans already in a lot of areas- it seems like we
have taught them what we do best.
In the future the things that we are less good at -compared to
Neanderthals- might be improved by trying to comprehend the
Neanderthal brain. A Neanderthal with nanotech computer implants -a
cyborg Neanderthal- might be something vastly superior to anything
that evolution has come up with until now.
That would be a theme for a science fiction novel!
I just hope some science fiction writer using this idea will not yield
to the temptation of scoring a short term success by addressing gut
feelings of fear and horror. Since possible developments are selected
only from those ideas that are considered feasible I see no gain in
painting the future all black and would much prefer ideas that enhance
a future where things are better for everyone.
We are now in a position where we can still decide which developments
we want and which developments we want to avoid. Because of the
enormous destructive potential of future technologies we might have no
other option than to concentrate on benign developments.
Anton