OpinionWe are the grey goo of Earth
      – BorgClown, 2010-01-10 at 23:00:41   (12 comments)

On 2010-01-10 at 23:01:54, BorgClown wrote...
So don't fear, grey goos can do quite well, considering they're accidents.
On 2010-01-10 at 23:44:54, Lee J Haywood wrote...
I think grey goo would be almost completely destructive, erasing the entire surface of the Earth. We're likely to wipe out a great many species, and perhaps even ourselves, but life would still be expected to recover from our influence faster than it would from grey goo.
On 2010-01-11 at 16:36:44, DigitalBoss wrote...
What about all the species that went extinct before humans increased greatly in population? There is nothing wrong with humans. I like humans. I had sex with one the other day. I despise all this negativism pointed at humans by the left today. Yes there is some bad things to say about humans, but I think that there is more good to say.
On 2010-01-11 at 21:22:32, BorgClown wrote...
I wasn't talking of humans specifically. A grey goo is some self-replicant nanomechanism capable of consuming its environment, in a sense, DNA is like the grey goo, it pervades everything and consumes it. Fortunately it evolved, otherwise Earth would be mostly a giant DNA soup. So, maybe the grey goo is not that fearful, as long as it doesn't have a 100% efficiency and a capability to evolve.
On 2010-01-11 at 21:24:14, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Hubba hubba!
On 2010-01-15 at 11:34:09, Lee J Haywood wrote...
DNA isn't like grey goo because it actually makes good use of the Earth and it maintains it. Many species of mineral wouldn't exist if not for life, and life regulates many systems on the planet. If you had a choice between a dead planet and ours with life on it, you'd probably opt for the latter.
On 2010-01-17 at 04:02:59, BorgClown wrote...
The basic grey goo would consume everything it can consume until only nanobots of its type exist. The question is, what would happen if it started to consume nanobots? Unless there's a infallible safeguard to avoid cannibalism, they will start to evolve, and who knows what will we end with. It is not that different of what happened with basic replicating molecules.
On 2010-02-04 at 09:28:25, Thelevellers wrote...
@DigitalBoss: I think that the things that make us human - such as compassion and self-awareness - are the thigns that *should* make us care about the other species of animal on the planet. Yes, thousands (millions? Billions?) of species have died out with no help from us at all, before humans even existed, but it's not those that I care about. (OK, that's a lie, woolly mammoths would be WAY coo to still have around!) The species I care about are the ones that we are killing off for no better reason than because a whole load of Chinese people think that Rhino horn will make them horny, or the people wanting to cash in on the high price of elephant ivory. There's no reason, other than greed, that these animals should be endangered, so why are they? The fact is, humans are neddlessly destructive, we could easily live to a reasonable standard with a MUCH smaller impact on the rest of the ecosystem - the compassionate, HUMAN, side of me says I should try and make it so if I can...
On 2010-02-04 at 09:29:01, Thelevellers wrote...
Incidentally, I do quite like the Grey Goo analogy for DNA. I agreed, though I'm not convinced it's quite right...
On 2010-02-04 at 11:19:40, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@Thelevellers: Unfortunately your beliefs will never be compatible with the majority of other beliefs, just as a non-smoker cannot simply persuade a smoker to quit nor a vegetarian convince a non-vegetarian to change. You can neither impose your views on others nor expect them to wake up to your ideas.
On 2010-02-05 at 21:06:05, Thelevellers wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Very true,and indeed why I've given up arguing with people most of the time. Also, I need to try and keep my blood pressure down - working with people that vote BNP isn't good for that... :(
On 2010-02-06 at 15:38:15, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@Thelevellers: Presumably those who would vote for the BNP lead emotional, irrational lives where they believe only in the cohesion of their own group, with rejection of other groups, and not in the ideals of tolerance and acceptance.