Yup, I agree. And the best way for that would have been faster progress of safety technology, IMO.

Thanks for the reply!

This text is short, so more nuances could be added. But I touch on the things you mention:

I think the general angst over one technology plowing ahead much further than the rest is exaggerated:

"Of course, giving Caligula a nuclear bomb wouldn't be great. But the risk of one technology progressing much faster than the general level of knowledge is low. Innovation depends on earlier innovation. There is a reason the Romans didn't have a Manhattan Project. If we increase the rate of innovation in one area, it will spill over and increase innovation in other areas as well."

David Deutsch also touches on this in a quote:
"The first flight of an airliner should not be carrying passengers. One should not trust the first predator 🐺 that seems friendly. But there is also danger from intangible enemies within, like taboos and pessimism. So one shouldn’t forgo the option to experiment with making use of the wolf. Unbeknownst to the people who first tried that, it would go on to create a new species 🦮 that could be of immense use – including guiding blind humans during the millennia before blindness is cured."

What I try to get across is that fast progress is often described, wrongly, like you do now, "pedal to the metal." 😀 That is often taken as an excuse to argue for slowing down or stopping progress -- and that is more dangerous than trying to speed things up.

 

Thanks Tony. Currently reading his Energy: A Beginner's Guide =)

Hi! CEO and Editor-in-Chief of Warp News and chairman of Warp Institute, with the mission to make the future come sooner, aka speed up progress.

We are a community of 50 000+ forward-looking, optimistic people worldwide. I'm based in Sweden, and my two co-founders in North Carolina.

Blog The Angry Optimist.
Twitter, Linkedin

Thanks!