Ready to be published? LXer is read by around 350,000 individuals each month, and is an excellent place for you to publish your ideas, thoughts, reviews, complaints, etc. Do you have something to say to the Linux community?
Whether we like it or not, geoengineering—what I’ve taken to calling “(re)terraforming the Earth”—is on the table as a strategy for dealing with onrushing climate disaster. This isn’t because it’s a particularly good idea; as far as we can now tell, the potential negative impacts of geoengineering projects may significantly outweigh any benefits. The reason why (re)terraforming is now the subject of so much attention is that, if it could be made to work, it would be a climate change remediation method, not just a climate change moderation method.
This article, in my opinion, was a worthwhile read.
The author seemed well-informed, and failed to talk beneath me.
I found the weakest link in his reasoning chain to be this quote:
"One argument often leveled against the open discussion of transformative technologies is that it puts dangerous “knowledge-enabled” technologies into the hands of people who would abuse them; such a charge isn’t likely to apply in any significant way to discussions of geotechnology."
While I personally buy the assertion, the author does not provide any evidence or logic to back it up. It needs backing up, I feel, because I believe that in general withholding of any information is wrong, except in very very narrow circumstances. Very narrow.
Withholding of information should always be the exception, never the rule.
Overall, the article suggests yet another way to apply FOSS principles to a subject not directly related to software. Like Groklaw has done for FOSS and the law, the article immediately suggests the question, "What other areas can we apply FOSS principles to?"
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:
|||||
10
Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
The author seemed well-informed, and failed to talk beneath me.
I found the weakest link in his reasoning chain to be this quote:
"One argument often leveled against the open discussion of transformative technologies is that it puts dangerous “knowledge-enabled” technologies into the hands of people who would abuse them; such a charge isn’t likely to apply in any significant way to discussions of geotechnology."
While I personally buy the assertion, the author does not provide any evidence or logic to back it up. It needs backing up, I feel, because I believe that in general withholding of any information is wrong, except in very very narrow circumstances. Very narrow.
Withholding of information should always be the exception, never the rule.
Overall, the article suggests yet another way to apply FOSS principles to a subject not directly related to software. Like Groklaw has done for FOSS and the law, the article immediately suggests the question, "What other areas can we apply FOSS principles to?"