Home-made bombs are being sent to physicists in Mexico

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110822/full/476373a.html

by acangiano • 15 years ago

154 31 15 years ago

mvzink• 15 years ago

For this audience, this might get more clicks if the title mentioned CS, nanotechnology, AI, etc. not physicists. And besides that, the title is incorrect: the only bomb mentioned in the article was sent to the author's brother; the author is a physicist, while his brother is a computer scientist and roboticist.

acangiano2• 15 years ago

Unfortunately, it's too late for me to change the title.

rhizome2• 15 years ago

If only there was a way to know that it was the brother before you posted.

VMG2• 15 years ago

TFA: In statements posted on the Internet, the ITS expresses particular hostility towards nanotechnology and computer scientists. It claims that nanotechnology will lead to the downfall of mankind, and predicts that the world will become dominated by self-aware artificial-intelligence technology.

The spooky thing is that this may not be as crazy as it sounds.

Vivtek6• 15 years ago

...

That's absurd, I'm sorry. Of course the world will become dominated by self-aware technology; it already is, after all. (Well - from our point of view, anyway. From the bacterial point of view it's pretty much bacteria all the way down.)

But to imagine that that self-aware technology will be anything but symbiotic with us is truly crazy. And certainly not something that bombs could fix anyway.

Also: what kind of lame anti-technology terrorist group posts its statements on the Internet?

feral• 15 years ago

>But to imagine that that self-aware technology will be anything but symbiotic with us is truly crazy.

Have you any argument to back up such a strong position?

>Of course the world will become dominated by self-aware technology; it already is, after all.

I'm not aware of any technological artifact that meets a reasonable definition of 'self-aware' - could you provide an example?

Why is it 'truly crazy' to imagine self aware technology could pose a threat to us? I don't think we've built any self-aware technology, and I suspect that if such technology is possible, its still a way off in the future. But if we did, I think we'd have to be extremely careful with it, and be very cautious of unintended consequences.

Its not unusual for people to consider the potential of such technology to be a threat. A commonly cited essay is Bill Joys wired article: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html

In the other direction, if you look at these guys, who are extremely optimistic about AI, they say one of their main research areas is on ensuring any such AI would be 'friendly': http://singinst.org/research/researchareas

I disagree with this 'ITS's assessment of the risks, as described in the Nature article. I completely disagree with their methods, obviously.

But I think that if self-aware technology was on the horizon, concerns about it potentially being a threat would be legitimate.

Asserting that it couldn't possibly be anything but symbiotic, without offering any evidence or argument to back that position up, is also crazy.

tzs• 15 years ago

> But to imagine that that self-aware technology will be anything but symbiotic with us is truly crazy

What makes you think no one will deliberately make self-aware technology that is hostile to us?

There are currently, and always have been, groups that take an "ends justifies the means" approach to achieving their goals--goals which often involve killing others. It's hard to believe none of them will use self-aware technology in weapons, or that we'll solve all the problem that lead to the existence of such groups before self-aware technology becomes common.

philwelch• 15 years ago

> But to imagine that that self-aware technology will be anything but symbiotic with us is truly crazy.

It took us thousands of years and the invention of the atom bomb to figure out how to live with other humans peacefully. Creating a potentially much more powerful conscious entity with its own volition, and without the weaknesses and limitations of flesh and blood humans, has a fundamentally unknown and therefore risky set of potential consequences.

> Also: what kind of lame anti-technology terrorist group posts its statements on the Internet?

That's a bit of a straw man argument. Everyone uses some technology, even the Amish. The question is what technology is beneficial to humanity, and it's fair to say we've invented more than a few things that hurt humanity more than they helped, like mustard gas and the electric chair.

shithead• 15 years ago

> Also: what kind of lame anti-technology terrorist group posts its statements on the Internet?

Good question. I'd say it depends where one draws the line. Some people draw it at horse-drawn buggies (and they may be right), others don't balk at electricity but reject some body-invading medical practices, others have very hard lines on human dignity.

I guess we'll find out, sooner or later, where the real line is by the collective "Oh, SHIT!" expletive when the tripwire is stepped on ...

andrewcooke• 15 years ago

for other spanish speakers, this group is called Individualidades Tendiendo a lo Salvaje and a google search gives plenty of hits for more info http://www.google.cl/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&...

(they don't seem to have a site; the statement is repeated on various anarchist blogs, but from dates and credits one of these may be the original http://liberaciontotal.lahaine.org/?p=1622 http://culmine.noblogs.org/post/2011/04/27/paquete-explosivo...)

dhughes• 15 years ago

The FBI should put a message on the Web saying they know where these terrorists are and they've already sent nanobot assassins to infect them.

iradik2• 15 years ago

I think this case is out of their jurisdiction.

5hoom• 15 years ago

Nothing is outside the jurisdiction of nanobot assassins, duh.

iradik2• 15 years ago

The article mentioned the group praises Ted Kaczynski, so most likely good to read this essay if you want to see their POV.

Industrial Society and Its Future (1995) by Theodore Kaczynski

http://web.cecs.pdx.edu/~harry/ethics/Unabomber.pdf

alnayyir• 15 years ago

I think ted was likely a great deal smarter than the people we're dealing with now.

itswindy2• 15 years ago

Maybe, but life is cheaper in Mexico and the police have bigger fish to fry, making the bombers more dangerous and less likely to got caught.

tripzilch• 15 years ago

What a bunch of dicks.

Home-made bombs are being sent to physicists in Mexico

Related Stories