X-Message-Number: 7120
From: 
Subject: Re: CryoNet #7114 wealth [Ettinger]
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 12:27:05 -0800

Mr. Ettinger writes:

>Message #7114
>From: 
>Date: Wed, 6 Nov 1996 12:01:21 -0500
>Subject: SCI. CRYONICS wealth
>
>For the near future it is monumentally unimportant, and only distantly
>related to cryonics; even so, I'll take a few minutes to defend my assertion
>that cryonics resuscitees are likely to have "essentially unlimited wealth."
>
>Remember, I postulated not only full-fledged nanotechnology, but also
>full-fledged Artificial Intelligence, with the ever-evolving machines acting
>as extensions of human brains and limbs. Such machines, with reasonable
>access to matter and energy,should be able to supply virtually unlimited
>goods, services, and information to the individual or family. 
>
>

Since the cryonics argument requires reliance on certain kinds of scenarios
about the future, I would recommend that subscribers to this list read _The
Art of the Long View_, by Peter Schwartz (New York: Currency/Doubleday, 1996).

Schwartz, one of those people who claim to make a living as a "futurist,"
points out that in constructing scenarios for making decisions about your
organization's future, it's extremely important to consider scenarios which
challenge your prevailing assumptions.  For example, while advising the
Royal/Dutch Shell oil company back in the 1970's, Schwartz got the company's
management to consider what it would do if the price of oil were suddenly to
collapse.  By planning against the prevailing wisdom in the oil industry of
the time, Royal/Dutch Shell was better able to deal with collapse of oil
prices in the early 1980's.

So as an analogous exercise for leaders in the cryonics movement, I propose
that you consider what you would do if (a) living standards in the U.S.
continue to stagnate, (b) nanotechnology doesn't live up its boosters'
extravagant promises, and (c) the computers never "wake up" and generate an
AI-driven technological singularity.  This is not to be confused with some
"doomsday" scenario, since I'm merely asking that you consider what you
would do if things stay pretty much the way they are now.

Mark Plus 



Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=7120