Jump to content

Lifeboat Foundation: Difference between revisions

From IdeaWazaWiki
← Older editNewer edit →

wikademia>Voluntary editor1976

→Lifeboat Foundation programs: Removed uncited criticism as per http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-May/046440.html
wikademia>Voluntary editor1976
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Image:Lifeboatfoundation.jpg|thumb|350px|right|The Lifeboat Foundation advocates the creation of space colonies to free humanity of concern or dependence on the planet Earth.]]
[[Image:Lifeboatfoundation.jpg|thumb|350px|right|The Lifeboat Foundation advocates the creation of space colonies to free humanity of dependence on the planet Earth.]]


'''The Lifeboat Foundation''' is a non-profit organization with an explicit mandate of "helping humanity survive [[existential risk]]s" and anticipate possible misuse of increasingly powerful technologies, including [[genetic engineering]], [[nanotechnology]], and [[AI|robotics/AI]], in the event of a [[technological singularity]].  Though they claim not to advocate any particular development in these technologies, this is at odds with promotion of space colonization which would almost necessarily rely on some of these technologies to quickly free humanity of the Earth.
'''The Lifeboat Foundation''' is a non-profit organization with an explicit mandate of "helping humanity survive [[existential risk]]s" and anticipate possible misuse of increasingly powerful technologies, including [[genetic engineering]], [[nanotechnology]], and [[AI|robotics/AI]], especially in the event of a [[technological singularity]].  The Lifeboat Foundation advocates scientific and technological advancements which will help humanity, and life in general, survive both natural and artificial [[existential risk]]s by identifying and implementing strategies to mitigate the overall threat that these increasingly powerful technologies pose and the threat that cataclysmic natural events pose.
   
   
The Lifeboat Foundation seeks to develop genetic engineering, nanotechnology and AI and other technologies to defend humanity, including defending it from consequences of its own damage or manipulation of the natural environment.  The Foundation does not include in its mandate any role nor need to protect non-human life, except those specific symbiotic life forms (such as gut bacteria or edible plants) that human beings would need to survive in space.  In other words the Foundation seeks to create lifeboats not arks which would facilitate survival of entire ecosystems and has been explicitly named "Lifeboat" as as to declare disavowal of the ark idea.
The Lifeboat Foundation advocates the development of genetic engineering, nanotechnology and AI and other technologies to defend humanity, including defending it from consequences of its own damage or manipulation of the natural environment.  The Foundation does not include in its mandate any role nor need to protect non-human life, except those specific symbiotic life forms (such as gut bacteria or edible plants) that human beings would need to survive in space.  In other words the Foundation seeks to create lifeboats not arks which would facilitate survival of entire ecosystems and has been explicitly named "Lifeboat" as as to declare disavowal of the ark idea.


Lifeboat claims to be pursuing new methods to combat viruses (such as RNA interference and new vaccine methods), effective nanotechnological defensive strategies.  However self-sustaining [[space colonies]] "in case the other defensive strategies fail" is its primary rationale, and when a risk to the Earth's biosphere might be increased by a particular strategy necessary to establish a space colony, Lifeboat's explicit mandate requires it to increase the risk to Earth.
The Lifeboat Foundation claims to be pursuing new methods to combat viruses (such as RNA interference and new vaccine methods), effective nanotechnological defensive strategies.  However self-sustaining mobile biosphere [[space colonies]] "in case the other defensive strategies fail" are one of it's ultimate long term goals.  When a risk to the Earth's biosphere might be increased by a particular strategy necessary to establish a space colony, because these risks are not existential to either humanity or all life on Earth, the Lifeboat Foundation suggests pursuing the necessarily technologies because ultimately all life on Earth will end when the next natural existential threat (asteroid impact, nearby supernovae, etc) manifests.


The Lifeboat Foundation was formed with the ethical premise that decreasing the likelihood of human extinction is the activity with the most positive [[utility]] on the planet today.  In recent years, several prominent public figures have stepped forward strongly in favor of mitigating extinction risks.  Oxford philosopher [[Nick Bostrom]] writes, “For standard utilitarians, priority number one, two, three and four should consequently be to reduce [[existential risk]].  The utilitarian imperative “Maximize expected aggregate utility!” can be simplified to the maxim “Minimize existential risk!”. <ref>Nick Bostrom, "[http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html Astronomical Waste: The Opportunity Cost of Delayed Technological Development]", Preprint, ''Utilitas'' Vol. '''15''', No. 3, pp. 308-314</ref>.  In most conceptions of this imperative the utility is with reference only to human beings or only to human societies, with no reference nor any role for non-intelligent or merely living creatures or habitats except insofar as intelligent beings may depend on the same biospheres for survival.
The Lifeboat Foundation was formed with the ethical premise that decreasing the likelihood of human extinction is the activity with the most positive [[utility]] on the planet today.  In recent years, several prominent public figures have stepped forward strongly in favor of mitigating extinction risks.  Oxford philosopher [[Nick Bostrom]] writes, “For standard utilitarians, priority number one, two, three and four should consequently be to reduce [[existential risk]].  The utilitarian imperative “Maximize expected aggregate utility!” can be simplified to the maxim “Minimize existential risk!”. <ref>Nick Bostrom, "[http://www.nickbostrom.com/astronomical/waste.html Astronomical Waste: The Opportunity Cost of Delayed Technological Development]", Preprint, ''Utilitas'' Vol. '''15''', No. 3, pp. 308-314</ref>.  In most conceptions of this imperative the utility is with reference only to human beings or only to human societies, with no reference nor any role for non-intelligent or merely living creatures or habitats except insofar as intelligent beings may depend on the same biospheres for survival. However the Lifeboat Foundation advocates the use of ARKs as genetic repositories in order to ensure the continuation and survival of as many life forms from Earth as possible. 


==Administration and Advisory Boards==
==Administration and Advisory Boards==
Line 20: Line 20:
The Lifeboat Foundation is [[tax exemption|tax exempt]] under [[501(c)(3)|Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code]].
The Lifeboat Foundation is [[tax exemption|tax exempt]] under [[501(c)(3)|Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code]].


The organization also has a very large Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), composed of 410 members as of October 2007.  This includes philosophers, economists, biologists, nanotechnologists, AI researchers, educators, policy experts, engineers, lawyers, ethicists, futurists, neuroscientists, physicists, and space experts. The SAB includes [[Ray Kurzweil]] and [[Nobel Prize]] winners [[Clive Granger]] and [[Wole Soyinka]].  Most of these advisoars are on the record as strongly favouring techno-centric or [[techno-optimist]] approaches to resolving human problems even if these have within living memory often resulted in [[technological escalation]] of conflict.  Kurzweil in particular is very often criticized for advocating "downloading" minds and for granting artificial intelligences legal status equivalent to those humans enjoy, while not adopting any balancing position such as that of [[Peter Barnes]] that ecosystems should he protected as a commons with legal trustees of their own.  The SAB does not publicly debate nor announce its positions or assumptions and is recruited without input from Lifeboat's opponents, unlike that of most nonprofits with controversial mandates that seek skeptical outsider input.
The organization also has a very large Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), composed of 410 members as of October 2007.  This includes philosophers, economists, biologists, nanotechnologists, AI researchers, educators, policy experts, engineers, lawyers, ethicists, futurists, neuroscientists, physicists, and space experts. The SAB includes [[Ray Kurzweil]] and [[Nobel Prize]] winners [[Clive Granger]] and [[Wole Soyinka]].  Most of these advisors are on the record as strongly favoring techno-centric or [[techno-optimist]] approaches to resolving human problems even if these have within living memory often resulted in [[technological escalation]] of conflict.  Because ultimately life on Earth will end with the next large asteroid impact.  Kurzweil in particular is very often criticized for advocating "downloading" minds and for granting artificial intelligences legal status equivalent to those humans enjoy, while not adopting any balancing position such as that of [[Peter Barnes]] that ecosystems should he protected as a commons with legal trustees of their own.  The SAB does not publicly debate nor announce its positions or assumptions and is recruited without input from Lifeboat's opponents, unlike that of most nonprofits with controversial mandates that seek skeptical outsider input.


==Lifeboat Foundation programs==
==Lifeboat Foundation programs==
Line 32: Line 32:
*[http://lifeboat.com/ex/space.habitats Space Habitats]
*[http://lifeboat.com/ex/space.habitats Space Habitats]


These projects assume and require development and spreading of knowledge of the exact technologies that the Foundation explicitly warns are dangerous.
These projects are "shields" and assume the development and spreading of knowledge of the exact technologies that the Foundation explicitly warns are dangerous, because ultimately technological advancement will continue.  It is not feasible to assume the complete cessation of technological advancement is even possible, and the Lifeboat Foundation does not advocate this position either because ultimately large scale natural existential threats WILL eventually destroy all life on Earth.  The Lifeboat Foundation is not a luddite organization and most of it's members are technological optimists.  However The Lifeboat Foundation does not automatically presume that all technology will never be misused.  The Lifeboat Shield programs are attempts by prominent members in these areas of technology to explicitly identify and mitigate the threats that misuse of these technologies pose.  The Lifeboat Foundation welcomes debate and discussion of the various existential threats and the best methods to mitigate those threats.


==See also==
==See also==

Revision as of 15:32, 9 September 2008

File:Lifeboatfoundation.jpg
The Lifeboat Foundation advocates the creation of space colonies to free humanity of dependence on the planet Earth.

The Lifeboat Foundation is a non-profit organization with an explicit mandate of "helping humanity survive existential risks" and anticipate possible misuse of increasingly powerful technologies, including genetic engineering, nanotechnology, and robotics/AI, especially in the event of a technological singularity. The Lifeboat Foundation advocates scientific and technological advancements which will help humanity, and life in general, survive both natural and artificial existential risks by identifying and implementing strategies to mitigate the overall threat that these increasingly powerful technologies pose and the threat that cataclysmic natural events pose.

The Lifeboat Foundation advocates the development of genetic engineering, nanotechnology and AI and other technologies to defend humanity, including defending it from consequences of its own damage or manipulation of the natural environment. The Foundation does not include in its mandate any role nor need to protect non-human life, except those specific symbiotic life forms (such as gut bacteria or edible plants) that human beings would need to survive in space. In other words the Foundation seeks to create lifeboats not arks which would facilitate survival of entire ecosystems and has been explicitly named "Lifeboat" as as to declare disavowal of the ark idea.

The Lifeboat Foundation claims to be pursuing new methods to combat viruses (such as RNA interference and new vaccine methods), effective nanotechnological defensive strategies. However self-sustaining mobile biosphere space colonies "in case the other defensive strategies fail" are one of it's ultimate long term goals. When a risk to the Earth's biosphere might be increased by a particular strategy necessary to establish a space colony, because these risks are not existential to either humanity or all life on Earth, the Lifeboat Foundation suggests pursuing the necessarily technologies because ultimately all life on Earth will end when the next natural existential threat (asteroid impact, nearby supernovae, etc) manifests.

The Lifeboat Foundation was formed with the ethical premise that decreasing the likelihood of human extinction is the activity with the most positive utility on the planet today. In recent years, several prominent public figures have stepped forward strongly in favor of mitigating extinction risks. Oxford philosopher Nick Bostrom writes, “For standard utilitarians, priority number one, two, three and four should consequently be to reduce existential risk. The utilitarian imperative “Maximize expected aggregate utility!” can be simplified to the maxim “Minimize existential risk!”. [1]. In most conceptions of this imperative the utility is with reference only to human beings or only to human societies, with no reference nor any role for non-intelligent or merely living creatures or habitats except insofar as intelligent beings may depend on the same biospheres for survival. However the Lifeboat Foundation advocates the use of ARKs as genetic repositories in order to ensure the continuation and survival of as many life forms from Earth as possible.

Administration and Advisory Boards

Current officers include:

  • President and Founder Eric Klien
  • International Spokesperson is Philippe van Nedervelde
  • Fundraising Director, North America is Michael Anissimov
  • Director of Long-term Strategy is Michael Vassar
  • International Director of Audiovisual Communications is Sergio M.L. Tarrero.

The Lifeboat Foundation is tax exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the United States Internal Revenue Code.

The organization also has a very large Scientific Advisory Board (SAB), composed of 410 members as of October 2007. This includes philosophers, economists, biologists, nanotechnologists, AI researchers, educators, policy experts, engineers, lawyers, ethicists, futurists, neuroscientists, physicists, and space experts. The SAB includes Ray Kurzweil and Nobel Prize winners Clive Granger and Wole Soyinka. Most of these advisors are on the record as strongly favoring techno-centric or techno-optimist approaches to resolving human problems even if these have within living memory often resulted in technological escalation of conflict. Because ultimately life on Earth will end with the next large asteroid impact. Kurzweil in particular is very often criticized for advocating "downloading" minds and for granting artificial intelligences legal status equivalent to those humans enjoy, while not adopting any balancing position such as that of Peter Barnes that ecosystems should he protected as a commons with legal trustees of their own. The SAB does not publicly debate nor announce its positions or assumptions and is recruited without input from Lifeboat's opponents, unlike that of most nonprofits with controversial mandates that seek skeptical outsider input.

Lifeboat Foundation programs

The Lifeboat Foundation's Scientific Advisory Board is working on a number of programs to assess risks, negate them ("shields"), and survive catastrophic events ("preservers"):

These projects are "shields" and assume the development and spreading of knowledge of the exact technologies that the Foundation explicitly warns are dangerous, because ultimately technological advancement will continue. It is not feasible to assume the complete cessation of technological advancement is even possible, and the Lifeboat Foundation does not advocate this position either because ultimately large scale natural existential threats WILL eventually destroy all life on Earth. The Lifeboat Foundation is not a luddite organization and most of it's members are technological optimists. However The Lifeboat Foundation does not automatically presume that all technology will never be misused. The Lifeboat Shield programs are attempts by prominent members in these areas of technology to explicitly identify and mitigate the threats that misuse of these technologies pose. The Lifeboat Foundation welcomes debate and discussion of the various existential threats and the best methods to mitigate those threats.

See also

Related topics:

References

  1. ↑ Nick Bostrom, "Astronomical Waste: The Opportunity Cost of Delayed Technological Development", Preprint, Utilitas Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 308-314
Retrieved from "https://ideawaza.com/index.php?title=Lifeboat_Foundation&oldid=37843"