Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncrcae!hubcap!gatech!uflorida!mailrus!cornell!uw-beaver!right!szabonj
From: szabonj@right (Nick Szabo)
Newsgroups: sci.space
Subject: Re: NSS Board membership
Message-ID: <94@beaver.cs.washington.edu>
Date: 19 Jan 89 04:09:48 GMT
References: <6145@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <1989Jan15.095906.18357@utzoo.uucp> <92@beaver.cs.washington.edu> <1989Jan18.043708.27547@utzoo.uucp> <1989Jan18.102436.12838@cs.rochester.edu> <6226@thorin.cs.unc.edu>
Sender: news@beaver.cs.washington.edu
Reply-To: szabonj@right.UUCP (Nick Szabo)
Organization: U of Washington, CSCI, Seattle
Lines: 20

> Fusion power? Life extension? Nanotechnology? Antimatter?
>AI? Sure, they're all *just* around the corner, and they'll all make
><desirable activity/goal X> *so* much easier, why bother to do
>anything about it with existing technology?

Space settlements are another example of *future* technology.  
Nanotechnology, which is based on the precision of current 
scientific instruments and the capabilities of living organisms, is no
more speculative than space settlements.  Nor is fusion or antimatter.
AI is quite a bit more unpredictable.

Good engineering is doing what is most economic and rewarding with current
technology.   Columbus and his crew, paddling to America in five hundred
rowboats, would not have been good engineering.

To improve the odds for tomorrow's engineers, new discoveries must be 
made today.  This means research and exploration.

------------------------
Nick Szabo              szabonj@fred.cs.washington.edu