[extropy-chat] future-sceptic jibes in the press

Robert Bradbury robert.bradbury at gmail.com
Thu Aug 17 01:34:31 UTC 2006


On 8/16/06, kevin.osborne <kevin.osborne at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Now, let's be clear, we're well aware that the dangers of
> counterfactual speculation ... are almost as grave as those of
> unbridled futurism."


Actually, there is noting wrong with conterfactual speculation as one could
easily wonder "If 911 had never happened would the Singularity be closer or
further away?".  If you understand the answers to the question it might
teach you something about what things you may be doing right or wrong.

Unbridled futurism is a perfectly reasonable thing to do.  What the
author(s) may not realize is that *all* capitalism involving start up
ventures involves a certain amount of unbridled futurism.  The key aspect of
raising funding is convincing investors that you can take something which
*does not exist* and bring it into existence.  It helps if you can show that
once it exists it can provide a return on investment.  It is extremely
doubtful that investors will hand over $$$ to a risky investment if the
entrepreneur is standing in front of the room and in a boring monotone
repeating the words, "And then we disassemble the asteroids, rearrange the
material using nanoconstructors and harvest the full solar output ending up
with a monopoly on cheap energy in the solar system."  People will be
calling for the men in white coats unless a certain amount of "unbridled
enthusiasm" is dished out as well.

As a person who has devoted a nontrivial amount of thought to how we get
from Point A (which is obvious to everyone) to point Q (which all but a few
of the most educated view as damn near impossible) and as someone who has
done several "impossible" things in his lifetime [1] I have to admit that I
am still puzzled as to why people cannot connect the dots and would think
that "unbridled futurism" is an undesirable activity [2].

Robert

1. My father summed this up a number of years ago, when he said "Rob, you
are the only person I know who can fall into a bucket of shit and come out
smelling like a rose."
2.  Of course if all one does is engage in "unbridled futurist" speculation
and never attempt to "make it real" then you might as well be viewed as a
"lesser cow" contributing your share of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere
[3].
3. The methane that cows produce is more powerful greenhouse gas than the
carbon dioxide that humans produce.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060816/2d158ccd/attachment.html>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list