Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Nth Extrapolation, a reasoned response and query
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 00:00:42 PST
>From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
>Subject: Nth Extrapolation (Re: (Vehicular Nano-Doc))

>Giving it AI or even something close to that is, that is the discussion
I was originally referring to.

I assume near AI capabilities would be needed to coordinate the
activities of the "nanites" to the larger task of repairing a vehicle.
No system I see in SR that is portable even comes near the power.
Learning pool aplies to a single, macroscale drone, at a high price.
Battle-tac's need to be on each drone in a network, and routed through a
deck that all drones are subscribed to. That implies either each nanite
carries good computing power, or they have a godlike communication
system (like a deck with a rating on the same order as the number of
nanites).
However, by AI, I do not mean that the system is self adaptive or
aware. Hackers working with the tech will take care of warping it into
twisted, unpredictable uses just fine!

> Everyone who posted a book, did so for books that
>involved the Nanites (crunch name here btw) making an evolutionary
>leap.

Actually, I mentioned only Neal Stepenson's "Diamond Age", which is
about SOCIETY making an evolutionary leap in response to nanotech not
too much more advanced than what you propose. It is set about 75 years
after the story in "Snowcrash", all the technology in Snowcrash being
more or less available to people in the SR world.
Yes, it suposes molecular manipulation. No, imho, that is not the
basic requirement for a masive societal impact- self replication and
versatility go most of the way.

>> Given:
>> A nanite repair system that can:
>> A) self replicate from stock materials.
>> B) Make alterations (repairs) to large scale objects composed of
>> complicated and multiple materials (vehicles).
>>
>> Result:
>> You have a nanite technology with few limits on its capability.
Self intellegence not required. "The street finds its own use for
things."
>
>No arguments there.

Good- at least we are talking about the same thing, not apples and
oranges!

>> Its like saying that pure matter coversion technolgy would be
limited to only synthesizing food, because somebody invented a "food
>> replicator".
>
>No, actually it isn't. It's saying that a physical construction tool
can do physically constructive (or destructive) things.

The point of my analogy was that a technolgy allowing dirrect
instantiation of physical goods by self replicating devices would be
uncontrolable in its socail, economic, and political impact. Nanite are
to poweful to be considered just a tool, if they have any level of
versatility.

>What I meant, and you went passed immediately, was that extrapolation
had limits that went beyond the original post. Everything has its
beginning, and all of what you said is true, in THEORY. But all of it
requires some leaps in science that is beyond so much.
>

IMHO, the original proposed device is so close in practice to a
"univerasal nano assembler" that it would rapidly lead to all the
scintific advances mentioned.

>> Originaly, the topic was what the stats for a nanite vehicle
repair system would likely be. My best guess was that such a system
could not existin SR without causing a huge world impact.
>
>That isn't how you worded it, your comments were on the line of (not a
quote, can't find the post now) 'such developments couldn't exist with
SR's existing tech level.'

Yes, I still believe it would take much advancement. If it WERE
possible, it would be done, and SR3 will be about a completely differnt
economic, social, and political setting.
>
>> Thus, likely stats: Mass, negligable (nanite storage plus small
nanite manufactured computer); cost, free or outrageous (like
software); availablity, nil (in 2057, probably until 3057).
Capabilties: equal to most other contemporary manufacture and medicine,
given proper opporating parameters, which would require collective
guidence of multitudes of independant entities for large scale
opperations. Synthesis of nano scale objects and possible custum
molecules not a problem. Such use might be sufficient for macroscale
effects.
>
>And it is the macroscale we are looking at. Vehicles, NOT molecules.
Youridea of mass is also -WAY- off. Nanites do require space,
especially the earlier theoretical models that haven't gone self aware.

I don't see how they requre much mass if they can self replicate-
cary an ounce, and, given materials, they will undergo geometric growth
wen needed until they bury the car.

> Also, go look at
>your Ant Colony (or other collective insectivorae for that matter).
Sure, they can do LOTS of things together, but I don't see them -dead
lifting- an entire engine block and carrying it away, or reshaping it
into something else. Trees, organic materials with organic flaws, yes.
Hard materials, that becomes questionable, if not outright difficult.

Actually, one way I think the MIGHT work is if they only carried out
chemical/ surfacing / materials tasks, and the heavy lifting/
fabrication was left to standard eqipment. A nanite paste capble of
forming a weld when applied to a joint would be keen, limited
aplication, and save some good time, not to mention mass on tools. If
the nanites could only be produced under restictive conditions (say a
vacuum chamber assembler device), you remove the "sorcerers aprentice"
syndrome of self replicating nanites as well.

>> Once you had the nainites, they could "repair" another car so
that it had a similar, but smaller, system. And so on, a
symbiotic...OOPs,
>> sorry, I was extrapolating.
>
>No, you are being headstrong. Take the first sentence. The Nanites
being suggested couldn't perform what you are suggesting, as they have
to have the ability to not only B/R (which means following a form or
design), but they must also have the ability to extrapolate on their
own. To augment and adjust for design. Without some VERY scary
Learning Pools (using an R2 rule), that is simply not going to be
possible in the current game system.

Figh. Building to half scale would be NO PROBLEM for a nanite, and
have no effect on the systems opperation. If they have B/R, just feed
in the specs, then install the smaller system in your own and others
cars.
The "symbiotic" aspect comes in when some jookster reprograms his
vehicular nano-doc to produce the equivelant of a vehicular "virus" or
"worm", that installs on every possible vehicle- hell, hacking through
gridlink, a COMPUTER hacker might be able to reprogram the nano-doc for
many other purposes.
Nano-hackers would then push the technology as far as they could,
leading to all sorts of chaos. That sort of speculation starts to go a
bit beyond necessary lines, though.
I guess I have little faith in the users to stick within "suggested"
opertions parameters, or those parameters to remain controlable by
ANYONE once they start getting messed with to much. Not that the tech
would be self aware, just out of control.

>
>> I'd actually say the situation of comparing SR nanites to
"nanomech" resembles the comparing the invention of the jaquard loom to
the PC. Both "do the same thing", but there is a universe of
differnence, in both scientific and engeneering progress.
>

>Yes, now just imagine if the Loom had been followed more correctly in
it's theory and apply such to actual medical usage beyond the age
apparent. Now there is Biotechnology waiting to happen. Stringing
strands of cellular mycotin along a pattern as designated by the
determinating factors/controllers. Quite feasible, quite expensive, but
already here. Please note I said cellular, not molecular.

If somebody had wanted to, they could have produced an acounting
systenm that would save no real time and money using a mechanical "loom"
type technology. Same goes for fixing cars with "nanites" in SR, IMO.

>
>You know what, there is stuff in SR that already does that. You want
to do
>what you are suggesting, go place the BattleTAC in control of the
Nanites,
>give it a major Flux Rating and each Nanite enough portable power
(grass =/=
>electrical current without something more) and then maybe, maybe, you
will
>get what you are stating.
>
>-K
>

Could you clarify that last for me? I don't undestand what your
getting at, besides that maybe how i picture "nanites" opperating is
very different from what you picture. Yes, i assume they need apower
source (not a problem- induction field, peizo electrics, micro flywheel)
and co-ordinated activity (problem).
Aside from technology being possible, do you expext to intigrate the
rapid socio-logical upheval the vehicular nano-doc system's technolgy
would lead to into any game you use the device in?
If you assume there is some limit on the adaptivity of the technolgy
to other purposes, what are those inherent limits? They would, IMO,
have to be hardware, not software, based. Otherwise, sombody like the
otaku would soon solve any software problems.

Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
of a psychotic - Einstein

get sucked into -The Vortex- Chicago's shadowland BBS
http://www.concentric.net/~evamarie/srmain.htm

====================================================================

>BTW, has anyone else heard they know how to turn aging on? Has anyone
else heard that they can keep the mouse from aging to death?

Isn't that the ting where they basically starved the mouse and kept its
oxegen consumption minimal? It had been a theory for a LONG time, and
they proved that minimizing celular metabolism prolongs life, yeah. Not
my choice for a fun lifestyle, however. I hear the proportional human
diet is like 500 calories per day, if thats possible with full
nutrition, and even the original researches are not sure thats safe.



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 2
From: Mike Bobroff <AirWisp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Nth Extrapolation, a reasoned response and query
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 09:41:36 -0500
In a message dated 97-11-09 03:01:46 EST, you write:

> I assume near AI capabilities would be needed to coordinate the
> activities of the "nanites" to the larger task of repairing a vehicle.
> No system I see in SR that is portable even comes near the power.
> Learning pool aplies to a single, macroscale drone, at a high price.
> Battle-tac's need to be on each drone in a network, and routed through a
> deck that all drones are subscribed to. That implies either each nanite
> carries good computing power, or they have a godlike communication
> system (like a deck with a rating on the same order as the number of
> nanites).
> However, by AI, I do not mean that the system is self adaptive or
> aware. Hackers working with the tech will take care of warping it into
> twisted, unpredictable uses just fine!

Personally, I think you are missing the entire point of the Nano-Mech ... you
have put the Nano-Mech on such a high pedistal that it is getting difficult
to see the potential of it, and all that you can choose to perceive is that
there is nothing in the rules that comes close, so it is therefore not
possible ... everything is possible given enough time and research and
funding ... take a look at Stealth technology today .. most of it is 20 years
old ... what is current SOTA for Stealth technology ? This is a rhetorical
question only ...

As for each micronite requiring a BattleTac ... though being nice, it is not
needed ... all the Central Control Unit needs is a IVIS FDDM reciever module
(which is also put onto the micronites to control each Macronite ... consider
the implications of the Snake Eyes technology outlined in the R2 ... imagine
an entire unit of 100 soldiers outfitted with the necessary cyberware ... and
then begin to image all the chaos in the world a rigger with that amount of
information coming in could do to the opposition ...

> > Everyone who posted a book, did so for books that
> >involved the Nanites (crunch name here btw) making an evolutionary
> >leap.
>
> Actually, I mentioned only Neal Stepenson's "Diamond Age", which is
> about SOCIETY making an evolutionary leap in response to nanotech not
> too much more advanced than what you propose. It is set about 75 years
> after the story in "Snowcrash", all the technology in Snowcrash being
> more or less available to people in the SR world.
> Yes, it suposes molecular manipulation. No, imho, that is not the
> basic requirement for a masive societal impact- self replication and
> versatility go most of the way.

Ummm, the Nano-Mech is not involved in molecular manipulation .. that part of
the development in nanotechnology is still in the R&D area thankfully for the
megacorps ...

> >> Given:
> >> A nanite repair system that can:
> >> A) self replicate from stock materials.
> >> B) Make alterations (repairs) to large scale objects composed of
> >> complicated and multiple materials (vehicles).
> >>
> >> Result:
> >> You have a nanite technology with few limits on its capability.
> Self intellegence not required. "The street finds its own use for
> things."
> >
> >No arguments there.
>
> Good- at least we are talking about the same thing, not apples and
> oranges!

Hmmm, sounds to me like you are starting to contradict yourself here ...

> >> Its like saying that pure matter coversion technolgy would be
> limited to only synthesizing food, because somebody invented a "food
> >> replicator".
> >
> >No, actually it isn't. It's saying that a physical construction tool
> can do physically constructive (or destructive) things.
>
> The point of my analogy was that a technolgy allowing dirrect
> instantiation of physical goods by self replicating devices would be
> uncontrolable in its socail, economic, and political impact. Nanite are
> to poweful to be considered just a tool, if they have any level of
> versatility.

No one denied that, in fact, nanites are already a force in economics in the
SR age, as they are the work-horses when it comes to cyberware creation and
implantation, and a host of other things, it is just that this is a new twist
to a very old thing (by Sr pov) ...

> >What I meant, and you went passed immediately, was that extrapolation
> had limits that went beyond the original post. Everything has its
> beginning, and all of what you said is true, in THEORY. But all of it
> requires some leaps in science that is beyond so much.
> >
>
> IMHO, the original proposed device is so close in practice to a
> "univerasal nano assembler" that it would rapidly lead to all the
> scintific advances mentioned.

It would, except for one thing, a Nano-Mech is only capable of acting on
things that it is programmed to act upon, and does not have the inspirational
capabilities of a human or an extremely advanced pilotting system (though
imagine the potential of having a dedicated Level 5 Pilot for the Nano-Mech
.. frightening ... though I would increase the design point value or cost of
the Pilot for just such a purpose however) ...

> >> Originaly, the topic was what the stats for a nanite vehicle
> repair system would likely be. My best guess was that such a system
> could not existin SR without causing a huge world impact.
> >
> >That isn't how you worded it, your comments were on the line of (not a
> quote, can't find the post now) 'such developments couldn't exist with
> SR's existing tech level.'
>
> Yes, I still believe it would take much advancement. If it WERE
> possible, it would be done, and SR3 will be about a completely differnt
> economic, social, and political setting.

No comment ...

> >> Thus, likely stats: Mass, negligable (nanite storage plus small
> nanite manufactured computer); cost, free or outrageous (like
> software); availablity, nil (in 2057, probably until 3057).
> Capabilties: equal to most other contemporary manufacture and medicine,
> given proper opporating parameters, which would require collective
> guidence of multitudes of independant entities for large scale
> opperations. Synthesis of nano scale objects and possible custum
> molecules not a problem. Such use might be sufficient for macroscale
> effects.
> >
> >And it is the macroscale we are looking at. Vehicles, NOT molecules.
> Youridea of mass is also -WAY- off. Nanites do require space,
> especially the earlier theoretical models that haven't gone self aware.
>
> I don't see how they requre much mass if they can self replicate-
> cary an ounce, and, given materials, they will undergo geometric growth
> wen needed until they bury the car.

And when they are not needed, the number of macronites is much lower ... to
keep upwith Optempo or basic maintenance capabilities ...

> > Also, go look at
> >your Ant Colony (or other collective insectivorae for that matter).
> Sure, they can do LOTS of things together, but I don't see them -dead
> lifting- an entire engine block and carrying it away, or reshaping it
> into something else. Trees, organic materials with organic flaws, yes.
> Hard materials, that becomes questionable, if not outright difficult.
>
> Actually, one way I think the MIGHT work is if they only carried out
> chemical/ surfacing / materials tasks, and the heavy lifting/
> fabrication was left to standard eqipment. A nanite paste capble of
> forming a weld when applied to a joint would be keen, limited
> aplication, and save some good time, not to mention mass on tools. If
> the nanites could only be produced under restictive conditions (say a
> vacuum chamber assembler device), you remove the "sorcerers aprentice"
> syndrome of self replicating nanites as well.

Sorry, think again ...

> >> Once you had the nainites, they could "repair" another car
so
> that it had a similar, but smaller, system. And so on, a
> symbiotic...OOPs,
> >> sorry, I was extrapolating.
> >
> >No, you are being headstrong. Take the first sentence. The Nanites
> being suggested couldn't perform what you are suggesting, as they have
> to have the ability to not only B/R (which means following a form or
> design), but they must also have the ability to extrapolate on their
> own. To augment and adjust for design. Without some VERY scary
> Learning Pools (using an R2 rule), that is simply not going to be
> possible in the current game system.
>
> Figh. Building to half scale would be NO PROBLEM for a nanite, and
> have no effect on the systems opperation. If they have B/R, just feed
> in the specs, then install the smaller system in your own and others
> cars.
> The "symbiotic" aspect comes in when some jookster reprograms his
> vehicular nano-doc to produce the equivelant of a vehicular "virus" or
> "worm", that installs on every possible vehicle- hell, hacking through
> gridlink, a COMPUTER hacker might be able to reprogram the nano-doc for
> many other purposes.
> Nano-hackers would then push the technology as far as they could,
> leading to all sorts of chaos. That sort of speculation starts to go a
> bit beyond necessary lines, though.
> I guess I have little faith in the users to stick within "suggested"
> opertions parameters, or those parameters to remain controlable by
> ANYONE once they start getting messed with to much. Not that the tech
> would be self aware, just out of control.

Unfortunately that is something we all have to deal with in some form or
fashion .. imagine all of the things modern day that could go wrong and
seriously cause all sorts of damage to people and economies ... they happen,
though luckily so far they have been only on very small scales and not too
damaging ...

An example from a book, in Clancy's Executive Decision, someone disperses an
aerosol based Ebola virus at several conventions across the USA ... or from
real-life ... the advanced control systems on board most new aircraft today
.. sometimes the pilot wants to do one thing and the auto-pilot continues
with the programmed in instructions and ignores or even fights the pilots
actions ... this caused a crash at an airchow within the last 10 years when
Airbus introduced one of it's more advanced aircraft designs ...

I would definitely day that would be an excellent example of tech gone out of
control ...

> >
> >> I'd actually say the situation of comparing SR nanites to
> "nanomech" resembles the comparing the invention of the jaquard loom to
> the PC. Both "do the same thing", but there is a universe of
> differnence, in both scientific and engeneering progress.
> >
>
> >Yes, now just imagine if the Loom had been followed more correctly in
> it's theory and apply such to actual medical usage beyond the age
> apparent. Now there is Biotechnology waiting to happen. Stringing
> strands of cellular mycotin along a pattern as designated by the
> determinating factors/controllers. Quite feasible, quite expensive, but
> already here. Please note I said cellular, not molecular.
>
> If somebody had wanted to, they could have produced an acounting
> systenm that would save no real time and money using a mechanical "loom"
> type technology. Same goes for fixing cars with "nanites" in SR, IMO.
>
> >
> >You know what, there is stuff in SR that already does that. You want
> to do
> >what you are suggesting, go place the BattleTAC in control of the
> Nanites,
> >give it a major Flux Rating and each Nanite enough portable power
> (grass =/=
> >electrical current without something more) and then maybe, maybe, you
> will
> >get what you are stating.
> >
> >-K
> >
>
> Could you clarify that last for me? I don't undestand what your
> getting at, besides that maybe how i picture "nanites" opperating is
> very different from what you picture. Yes, i assume they need apower
> source (not a problem- induction field, peizo electrics, micro flywheel)
> and co-ordinated activity (problem).
> Aside from technology being possible, do you expext to intigrate the
> rapid socio-logical upheval the vehicular nano-doc system's technolgy
> would lead to into any game you use the device in?

The question becomes how people react to change ... and how they percive it
to themselves ..

> If you assume there is some limit on the adaptivity of the technolgy
> to other purposes, what are those inherent limits? They would, IMO,
> have to be hardware, not software, based. Otherwise, sombody like the
> otaku would soon solve any software problems.

You don;t know how close you are ...

> >BTW, has anyone else heard they know how to turn aging on? Has anyone
> else heard that they can keep the mouse from aging to death?
>
> Isn't that the ting where they basically starved the mouse and kept its
> oxegen consumption minimal? It had been a theory for a LONG time, and
> they proved that minimizing celular metabolism prolongs life, yeah. Not
> my choice for a fun lifestyle, however. I hear the proportional human
> diet is like 500 calories per day, if thats possible with full
> nutrition, and even the original researches are not sure thats safe.
>

On this topic, no, it had nothing to do with oxygen intake, it had to do with
genetic manipulation ...

Mike

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Nth Extrapolation, a reasoned response and query, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.