X-Message-Number: 3541
Newsgroups: sci.cryonics
From: Peter Merel <>
Subject: Re: computer people
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 1994 23:40:09 GMT

 writes:
>So one may ask: Aren't other scientists equally logical?

Well, for a start, most "computer people" are not scientists at all. We're
engineers. We're used to building solutions with our minds and hands, and 
we're used to expecting new technology. Many of us specifically design
solutions that will employ technology that does not exist yet. We don't care
much about fundamental investigations of nature and mathematics - we care
about using tools to make tools. 

Therefore when it is suggested to us that nanotech will be implemented, we
don't flinch. When it is suggested to us that we can backup our own minds,
we don't ask, "but how can that be?"; we ask "when will the technology become
available?" and "how much will it cost?" and "what are the limitations?".
"How can that be?" is a scientist's question. "What are the limitations?"
is an engineer's question.

>Perhaps what it boils down to--one way to say it--is that most people,
>including most scientists, think the universe is MYSTERIOUS and grand
>ambitions are foolish if not wicked. Computer people, on the other hand,
>think that (for most practical purposes) the world is not mysterious, only
>COMPLICATED, and enough careful work and ingenuity can accomplish almost
>anything.

On the contrary, I think that "computer people" are used to the impossible.
The halting problem, Goedel and Rice's theorems, physical limits to 
computability, all of these things tell us about what the limits are.
Our attitude, however, is that if it is feasible then it will be done,
sometime, somewhere, by someone. Show us that cryonics is feasible, and
we immediately see that it will happen. That is a leap that is more
difficult for a scientist, who puts no faith in engineering and has no
tools philosophy.

>Do these conjectures have any usefulness? Probably very little, since they do
>not seem to suggest any new cryonics recruitment strategies. 

All cryonics needs is a marketing image. Look at the popularity that "the
information superhighway" has drummed up among the punters. Your problem is
that the moment you say "cryonics" people immediately think "grandpa's head
in the freezer". We have to give them an image that works a lot better than 
that.

How could this be done? There are already some hooks in the popular 
consciousness. Rerun that scene out of "Cocoon", with the old man saying
to his grandson, "We won't die, We won't get sick or old. We will see the
stars." "But Grandpa, will I ever see you again?" "It might take a while,
but yes, you will." One week of primetime ads would have a million people 
lining up outside your door. 

Get Hollywood on-side - offer free suspensions to producers and scriptwriters. 
Make the people who popularise ideas see that cryonics can be done. Offer 
free suspensions to presidents and business leaders - if Bill Gates were 
to come out in favour of cryonics, a million MS drones would sign up the 
next day. If Patrick Stewart were to come out in favour of cryonics, a 
million trekkies would sign up. Give _free_ suspensions to Stewart and 
Gates - your profits will make up the shortfall a millionfold.

-- 

Internet:           |         Accept Everything.            |

http://www.usyd.edu.au/~pete           |         Reject Nothing.               |

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3541