Subject: Re: crux of the essence
From: "Forrest J. Cavalier III" <mibsoft@mibsoftware.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 07:35:18 -0400 (EDT)

> "Forrest J. Cavalier III" wrote:
> > There is still the scarcity of effort needed to create intellectual
> > things, (at least until the computers are doing the thinking.)
> 
> Why would having computers doing the thinking reduce scarcity? We
> already have a few billion thinkers available...

I am fond of humans, but if ideas are the good to be produced,
they will be at a disadvantage to computers.  For instance:

Humans process only a few bits a second (even though they are
remarkably good at picking valuable bits to process.) I think
computers will get better at picking valuable bits to process,
and Moore's law predicts that they will be able to process them
much faster than a few bits a second.  

Distraction may be an essential characteristic (or requirement) of
intelligence and computer systems are complex enough that they show
characteristics of getting distracted. But to operate properly for
lengths of time, humans require too much distraction.

As more people get computers, they are able to cooperate in 
intellectual neighborhoods, but the vast majority of the
billions of thinkers you mention operate only in physical
neighborhoods.  Even if all humans were networked, I
think that humans USING tools of communication will never
communicate as efficiently as computers which ARE a tool
of communication.  The latencies and inefficiencies in
the human-computer interface will be reduced, but will
always be significant.