Re: [GZG] [OFFICIAL] Question: was Re: [SG3]: What if?

[Doug Evans <devans@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Allan Goodall wrote on 02/07/2008 08:06:43 PM:

> On Feb 7, 2008 1:23 PM, Binhan Lin <binhan.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
***snippage***

> > Technology will force human action
> > to higher and higher levels of decision making - the minutae will be
handled
> > by computers, so issues such a communication lag, communication loss
etc.
> > are moot - the computer knows what it needs to do and will do it, it
doesn't
> > need to be micromanaged.
>
> Funny enough, that's the same thing I was arguing on this list a
> decade ago. At the time, most list members argued against it, partly
> because they like the sci-fi idea of humans in the cockpit, but there
> was all sorts of touchy-feely "humans are special" and "computers are
> predictable" comments, too.
>

Good gosh, we aren't going to get started about 'MK I eyeball' again, are
we? ;->=

Not sure if it's up to a sea change just yet, but 'within 200 years' seems
a more conservative than necessary.

For the romantics amongst us, the same rationalization as with
biologic/nano warfare may gloss this over; if one side or the other has the
advantage, there's no contest, and therefore, no game. Otherwise, there's
still room for PBI.

Or, as we in the gentleman's service say, "Nuke the site from orbit; it's
the only way to be sure."

The_Beast


_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l