[extropy-chat] Darwin Award

[Samantha Atkins]

On May 18, 2006, at 10:39 PM, jeffrey davis wrote:

>
>
> On 5/18/06, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com > wrote:
>
>
> It is not irrelevant as the type of technology available determines  
> the costs of such a project and its  feasibility.   Sufficiently  
> advanced automation to accomplish this task as well as sufficient  
> resources and sustaining technology may require nanotechnology and  
> AI.  I think that it will.  If you think otherwise then please make  
> your case.
>
> - samantha
>
> You're perhaps familiar with "Advanced automation for space  
> missions"(AASM), a seminal work on self-replication by Freitas et  
> al. sometimes referred to as the 1980 NASA summer study.  A quarter  
> century ago Freitas declared self-replication doable, and on the  
> moon no less, with the attendant severe restrictions on human on- 
> site assistance.  So it's not really my case but Freitas's.


Assuming sufficient resources, energy, control and logics that can't  
be locally replicated without something like MNT, yes?

>
> Engineering-wise, it's about control systems. Our current  
> industrial system with humans in the loop has 100 percent closure.   
> Replacing the humans requires control systems.

How sophisticated are these likely to need to be to build  
infrastructure capable of supporting large numbers of humans in a  
hostile environment.  Where is the case that we have that  
sophistication remotely in hand or will have with less than major AI  
advancements?

>
> Since 1980 we've seen how many doublings of computational capacity,  
> which translates into vastly cheaper (and/or vastly more capable)  
> control systems components?   Using Moore's law as a rough guide,  
> in the twenty-five years since AASM, control element costs have  
> fallen, or capability risen, by a factor of 10e6.
>

Total hand waving.  Chip density and raw speed to not remotely  
directly translate to increased autonomous control capabilities.

>
> Beyond that, the obstacles to implementation remain vision,  
> creativity, the size of the project(very big), and perhaps  
> political will.  Personally, I prefer to dispense with political  
> will and go with vision and creativity.
>
> That said, many smart folks still contend that the problem is "too  
> hard".  Add the daunting size of the undertaking and it becomes a  
> non-trivial matter to mobilize enough folks to "Just give it a try  
> and well see if it can be done."  That's where the creativity comes  
> in.


Thanks for for the rah-rah non-answer.

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060519/3bbfaafe/attachment.html>