3 ms·

I never heard/read that quote by Einstein; interesting. Here is the full quote for the curious: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/17014-the-release-of-atomic-po

I never heard/read that quote by Einstein; interesting. Here is the full quote for the curious: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/17014-the-release-of-atomic-power-has-changed-everything-except-our http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/17014-the-release-of-atomic-...

M_Grey 10y ago
I live my life by that single insight: technology and progress do not change human nature. Behavior, sure, but not our nature. Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  > Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible. Here's the problem though: most interesting and useful technologies of the future are not compatible with human nature. E.g. any interesting interplanetary drive that would give us reasonable transit times is at the same time a powerful WMD, simply because of the energies we'll be working with. Or bio/nanotech, dream of so many industries, is also potentially much worse than nukes. Makes me worry if we grow up in time, or end up killing ourselves with our toys.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    You've hit on why I don't see humanity's long-term survival as very likely, and why I find the Great Filter hypothesis so compelling.
    - noir_lord 10y ago
      It's also why if we where rational as a species we'd be focusing on becoming a genuine space borne/multi-planetary civilisation. Our best shot at surviving the great filter is been spread out enough that when someone goes "Ooops" and levels wherever they are there are other self-sufficient humans far enough away to survive. Not sure if we'll ever achieve that (though I think in totality it's only just beyond our current technology) though since it would require a colossal investment that would make the Apollo program look tiny to bootstrap it. barring some significant breakthrough in fusion.
      - alphapapa 10y ago
        > Our best shot at surviving the great filter is been spread out enough that when someone goes "Ooops" and levels wherever they are there are other self-sufficient humans far enough away to survive. This idea of compartmentalization is a strong argument against globalism. "Oops"es in government, society, and culture can be just as deadly.
      - c-smile 10y ago
        Wondering if it is even possible to convince humanity to focus on creating multi-stellar civilization at this point until it is not too late. Instead of fighting in sandboxes, et cetera.
        M_Grey 10y ago
        http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/ I'm afraid not.
- emmelaich 10y ago
  > Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible. They've been around for quite a while, so the evidence is against that conclusion.

M_Grey 10y ago

I live my life by that single insight: technology and progress do not change human nature. Behavior, sure, but not our nature. Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
> Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible. Here's the problem though: most interesting and useful technologies of the future are not compatible with human nature. E.g. any interesting interplanetary drive that would give us reasonable transit times is at the same time a powerful WMD, simply because of the energies we'll be working with. Or bio/nanotech, dream of so many industries, is also potentially much worse than nukes. Makes me worry if we grow up in time, or end up killing ourselves with our toys.
- M_Grey 10y ago
  You've hit on why I don't see humanity's long-term survival as very likely, and why I find the Great Filter hypothesis so compelling.
  - noir_lord 10y ago
    It's also why if we where rational as a species we'd be focusing on becoming a genuine space borne/multi-planetary civilisation. Our best shot at surviving the great filter is been spread out enough that when someone goes "Ooops" and levels wherever they are there are other self-sufficient humans far enough away to survive. Not sure if we'll ever achieve that (though I think in totality it's only just beyond our current technology) though since it would require a colossal investment that would make the Apollo program look tiny to bootstrap it. barring some significant breakthrough in fusion.
    - alphapapa 10y ago
      > Our best shot at surviving the great filter is been spread out enough that when someone goes "Ooops" and levels wherever they are there are other self-sufficient humans far enough away to survive. This idea of compartmentalization is a strong argument against globalism. "Oops"es in government, society, and culture can be just as deadly.
    - c-smile 10y ago
      Wondering if it is even possible to convince humanity to focus on creating multi-stellar civilization at this point until it is not too late. Instead of fighting in sandboxes, et cetera.
      - M_Grey 10y ago
        http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/ http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/ I'm afraid not.
emmelaich 10y ago
> Human nature and nuclear weaponry are not compatible. They've been around for quite a while, so the evidence is against that conclusion.