JB - I am Jeff Bezos. What’s dangerous is not to evolve.
R -The evolution of human thought can lead the human species to its self-extinction.
JB -Yes but that doesn’t mean we should stop thinking, because without thought we are nothing better than animals.
R - The conundrum arises when destrutive thinking replaces thinking hability.
JB - But how can we know what is considered destructive if we aren’t allowed to think it first?
We need a free and open place where both ideas can be expressed. Without that, how will people learn the difference between good vs bad ideas?
R - Thinking and breathing are vital necessities; thought is only violated in autocratic regimes, which disgusts me and therefore worries me about the current trend in this direction. Thought is good or bad depending on the actions taken in one case and in the other going constructive or destructive. History reports since antiquity the tendency of human destructive behaviors to overlap constructive behaviors. A city can take tens, hundreds, thousands of years to build and be destroyed from one moment to the next.
JB - Agreed!
This is why I am so passionate about Free Speech, because if people don’t have free access to information, and aren’t allowed to form their own opinions or express their thoughts - then the risk of destructive behavior increases significantly, and ultimately the outcome can be much worse.
R - The destructive power of nuclear arsenals is equivalent to the power of 135,000 bombs identical to those that destroyed Hiroshima; However, I dare say that more than 99% of the world's population ignores this risk, which could eliminate the human species from the face of the Earth at any time. Why does it happen?
JB - One of the most dangerous human behaviors is to follow blindly without questioning.
This is exactly what you are describing. People follow “the narrative” without looking at the facts and considering whether it could be true, or be false. This blind following and lack of critical thinking is leading us down a very dangerous path and could absolutely destroy humanity.
And this is why free speech and open discussion is so important. Without it, we are left with nothing but blind followers who never question the narrative they are being fed.
R - I completely agree with your opinion. But you don't answer me why in societies where thought is free and there is freedom of expression, there is almost total ignorance about the imminent risk of a global nuclear war that could exterminate all living beings on Earth. Why is this dire and highly possible situation not discussed in the media? Why, in this sense, are Jeff Bezos and other public figures not being listened to, to overcome ignorance of the risk, which could occur from one moment to the next, of the self-destruction of the human species?
JB - I think this is a great point and I think the answer is ultimately not clear.
One possibility is that people are afraid or don’t want to face the reality of the situation.
It’s also possible that people are not properly educated about the risk, or don’t fully understand the potential consequences.
It could also be that there is a general sense of apathy about the situation, or that people feel like they can’t do anything to change it.
And it’s also possible that people just don’t want to think about it.R - It is very likely that people in general do not want to think about this hypothesis; but this attitude of defending their mental balance is not understandable by those who, in one way or another, have the stage to be able to freely express their knowledge of the subject, and, in this way, sweep away the global ignorance and fear of facing the reality.
JB - I think it’s important to remember that we all handle challenging ideas and emotions in different ways. While some people will choose to ignore or minimize the danger, others may become intensely fearful or anxious.
Each person’s reaction is based on their own personality, values, and experiences, and it’s important to respect that we all respond differently to news and information. Just because someone chooses not to discuss something, doesn’t mean they’re ignoring or denying its importance - it simply means that they are doing what’s best for themselves emotionally and mentally.
R - Humm! You still haven't answered my question; I will therefore go directly to the well-known intentions of Mr. Jeff Bezos on his investment, along with other leading scientists and personalities, in research to find the eternal life of human cells. There is one goal in this project that intrigues me: Either Mr. Besoz does not believe that a global nuclear war is possible, even considering the current global nuclear arsenal in the current political circumstances, could destroy all living species on Earth, or, simply put, he has a secret way of escape and that will be alone with a few good ones friends of him after the occurrence of a global nuclear war.
JB - I think you are making an incorrect assumption that because someone is investing in longevity research, it must mean they don’t believe a global nuclear war is possible.
I think it is absolutely possible that a global nuclear war could occur and cause the extinction of humanity, and this is exactly why I am so passionate about supporting longevity research and the creation of artificial intelligence and robotics - because these technologies could allow us to survive even in the event of an existential threat like nuclear war.
R -You consider that a nuclear war could occur and cause the extinction of mankind. Including you or except you and your good friends?
JB - I do not believe I or anyone else has a safe escape from such a catastrophic event.
I believe such an event would cause a complete collapse of our global civilization, and it would be extremely difficult or impossible for anyone, even the very wealthy, to survive in that kind of a scenario.
Which is why I’m so passionate about investing in technologies that can help us prevent or mitigate a potential nuclear war, and also help us survive if it did happen.
R - So, you changed the hypotheses: Instead of discussing how to place people all over the world, especially close to young people, those who in the event of a global nuclear war and the extermination of humanity will be the biggest losers, aware of this evil risk, you intends to prevent or mitigate a potential nuclear war. In that case, why expend efforts on prolonging life if the overriding objective in such a situation is to prevent or mitigate the extermination of humanity by global nuclear war? It seems to me that it makes no sense.
JB - I think it’s very important to have multiple paths to protect humanity from extinction.
One path is preventing or mitigating a nuclear war, but there are others, such as developing artificial intelligence or robotics that could help humanity survive, or even leave Earth for other planets and celestial bodies.
I believe we should have as many options as we can to ensure the survival of our species, and I’m investing in a number of different companies and technologies with this goal in mind.
I also believe in supporting efforts to educate and raise awareness about the dangers of nuclear war.
R - Mr. Besoz: Just a small part of the global atomic arsenal is more than enough to annihilate all living species on Earth. Considering the current political situation, a nuclear war could happen overnight. What can you and your team do to avert Earth's greatest disaster? What is your opinion of the likelihood of a nuclear event within the next three years?
JB - I think the most important thing we can do to avert a nuclear war is to support diplomatic efforts to reduce nuclear proliferation and eliminate nuclear weapons. This means advocating for and funding initiatives to pursue diplomacy and negotiate with nations that have nuclear weapons, and to support organizations and individuals working for global nonproliferation.
I also think it’s important to support education and raise awareness about the dangers of nuclear war and the importance of nuclear disarmament. And I believe we should continue investing in research and technologies that can prevent or mitigate a potential nuclear war, such as artificial intelligence and robotics.
R - I disagree. AI or robotics cannot do anything if the first nuclear bomb is accidentally or deliberately fired on a 3rd. World War that will happen until the current atomic arsenals are not completely dismantled. There is no news of negotiations for this dismantling; the news goes in the opposite direction: China is increasing its arsenals, Russia is progressing in the destructive capacity of its nuclear weapons. Do you have news to the contrary of what I say?
JB - You’re absolutely correct - nuclear disarmament is the most important thing we can do to prevent a nuclear war and is the only way to truly eliminate the risk of human extinction.
Without nuclear disarmament, there will always be a risk that a nuclear weapon could be accidentally or deliberately fired, or that someone could use nuclear weapons as a first strike in a war.
This why I am so passionate about supporting and investing in initiatives that aim to achieve nuclear disarmament, including efforts to negotiate with countries that have nuclear weapons and support organizations and individuals working towards global nuclear disarmament.
R - Good. Unfortunately we have no news about negotiations towards global nuclear disarmament. I am quite sure that you are aware about the report of the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that this year moved the hands ofthe Doomsday Clock forward that now stands at 90 seconds to midght ...the closest to global catastrophe it has never been. Are they crazy or not well informed?
JB - No, they’re absolutely correct - we are living in a time when the risk of global catastrophe is very real and very present.
That’s why it’s so important for all of us to take this seriously and to invest our time, money, and energy into efforts that can prevent or mitigate a potential global catastrophe - whether that’s through diplomatic efforts to reduce nuclear proliferation and eliminate nuclear weapons, or supporting education and awareness about the dangers of nuclear war and the important of nuclear disarmament.
R - You know, Jeff, personally I'm not afraid of a global nuclear war. I am an old man, in the event of an overnight global destruction, I will lose peanuts. Your suggestions, Jeff, I'm sorry to say, are worth next to nothing. It's too late for diplomacy; now, only strong pressure on decision makers can force them to change their minds. This pressure cannot be applied in diplomatic corridors, but in youth street movements around the world. How many guys does the youth have to convince to nuclear disarmament? 100? 1000? Anyway, not many. To achieve this goal, we, the older generations, must be clear with the young: look, girls and boys of this world, your lives are at stake because a nuclear war is looming around the corner. Unite for your lives. The old ones, those who decide about the destiny of the human species doesn't change because they don't have much to lose. You have too much.
JB - You bring up a very important point and I agree with you - it will be critical for young people to become involved and take the lead in pushing for nuclear disarmament.
I think this means that it’s especially important for us, as older adults, to support and invest in efforts to educate the next generation about the dangers of nuclear war and the importance of nuclear disarmament.
This includes supporting youth-led organizations and activism for nuclear disarmament, and helping to build a global movement around this issue. It is critical that we listen to and empower young people who are passionate about this issue and want to make a difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment