I can sort of see why Musk is annoying to scientists because he tends to use 
ideas and technology that already exist.
So, what is he really adding?   Neuralink is in this category.    That company 
is making the technology work at a larger scale and at lower power and making 
the surgery repeatable.  The company (not him) is making it practical and 
approaching it like a product.   Some scientists are prone to thinking that 
engineering is a not a thing or that a product mindset is just superficial.   
Or even that money doesn't matter.

I'm less enamored with Musk's futurism than I am appalled at tunnel vision, 
overspecialization, and risk aversion of so many others.   The annoyance people 
have at Musk can only be because they must acknowledge his influence.   And 
seeing that influence they conclude he is somehow responsible for the world in 
the way that, say, Joe Biden is responsible for the world.  Or as Feynman put 
it,  “You have no responsibility to live up to what other people think you 
ought to accomplish. I have no responsibility to be like they expect me to be. 
It's their mistake, not my failing.”   What would be the point of being a 
billionaire if you couldn't at least be the dork you want to be?

Before Space X had customers and a track record, there were all the NASA old 
fogies saying he'd be killing people and he could not possibly do it.  Am I 
glad to see them so wrong?  Yes.  It is not because he is the best or some Tony 
Stark.   It is because they are the worst.

Marcus



________________________________
From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> on behalf of Steve Smith 
<sasm...@swcp.com>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 8:23 AM
To: friam@redfish.com <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Cautionary Tales: CliFi



On 1/27/22 10:01 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

< Musk is trying to kick our cans from fossil fuel extraction/combustion/spills 
to Lithium (and heavy metals) extraction/discarding as well as the can of an 
out of-balance biosphere on earth to terraforming Mars (with care and 
thoughtful intention and no unexpected side-effects?).  >

https://www.xprize.org/prizes/elonmusk#prize-activity


yes to electrolizing water into hydrogen (and even creating ammonia as a more 
easily stored/transported/cracked "carrier" for hydrogen, up to ammonia fuel 
cells, etc.)   technically very likely and "doable" with a somewhat limited 
*known* downside.   Though the fossil fuel and battery industries have a long 
enough list... but clearly biased.   We neo-luddites have long lists as well, 
with similar caveats.   I was raised by Calvinists so I recognize in myself 
when I am generally just being negative about anything  that might be "fun", 
but that doesn't stop me from being skeptical anyway.  I am also of the "if it 
feels good, do it" generation...  extreme Hedonism and Calvinism only polarize 
an otherwise complex and rich space.  TANSTAAFL in my (post-Libertarian) 
vocabulary is "there aint no such thing as a free lunch, but that doesn't mean 
you can't eat someone else's when they aren't looking".

And yes to Musk being a puzzling and mixed hero/villain.   I don't doubt his 
*intentions*, I think they are (by his values and view of the stakes at hand) 
righteous.  That doesn't preclude him being an egomaniac with an exponentially 
growing clout/sense ratio.   I can't see any of his earth-focused tech as 
anything but a (very well crafted) double-pronged strategy...  gathering the 
economic leverage of doing "useful" things on the earth (electrifying and 
solarizing)... whilst developing technology useful for colonizing/terraforming 
mars.   CO2 harvesting is an obvious one, as is tunneling and broad 
electrification  (are his residential heat-pumps on the market yet?)...   
perfect for taking to Mars.

I believe that GeoEngineering is inevitable, given who we are (Homo Faber) but 
I also believe our future exercises in this realm will "rhyme" with all of our 
previous engineering "miracles".  Maybe we *can* rhyme our way out of the 
corner we rhymed ourselves into...  but I fear that most if not all of our R&D 
is biased toward short-term and narrow goals (Glen's rant about "values" and 
corruption), and defined by confirmation biases...

I'm probably just barking at the church choir here...


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:
 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to